https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363287 The Tribunal held that the appellants were not eligible for CENVAT credit on input services used for trading activities due to failure to maintain separate accounts for common inputs, as required by Rule 6(2) and 6(3A) from 1.4.2011. The Tribunal remanded the matter for reevaluation of the demand and quantification of credit, allowing the appellants to present additional evidence. The appeal was partly allowed for further review and consideration, emphasizing compliance with the amended rules and accurate assessment of tax liability. en-us Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:17:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363287 The Tribunal held that the appellants were not eligible for CENVAT credit on input services used for trading activities due to failure to maintain separate accounts for common inputs, as required by Rule 6(2) and 6(3A) from 1.4.2011. The Tribunal remanded the matter for reevaluation of the demand and quantification of credit, allowing the appellants to present additional evidence. The appeal was partly allowed for further review and consideration, emphasizing compliance with the amended rules and accurate assessment of tax liability. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363287