https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350278 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision on the availment of CENVAT credit on common input services used for trading and taxable output services, directing quantification of reversal based on Rule 6(3A). It ruled that interest on full credit availed on capital goods in the first year was erroneous, allowing credit in subsequent years. CENVAT credit on FRO crates was permitted as they were essential for output services. The matter of credit on capital goods without proper documents was remanded for further assessment. The judgment ensured adherence to legal provisions and precedents in determining CENVAT credit eligibility. en-us Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Nov 2017 10:11:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350278 The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities' decision on the availment of CENVAT credit on common input services used for trading and taxable output services, directing quantification of reversal based on Rule 6(3A). It ruled that interest on full credit availed on capital goods in the first year was erroneous, allowing credit in subsequent years. CENVAT credit on FRO crates was permitted as they were essential for output services. The matter of credit on capital goods without proper documents was remanded for further assessment. The judgment ensured adherence to legal provisions and precedents in determining CENVAT credit eligibility. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350278