https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364292 Penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act cannot be sustained on wrongful availment of credit alone unless the record establishes fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, and on that basis the penalty was set aside. The disputed CENVAT credit also required factual verification of the invoices and related documents, including whether the invoices were properly addressed and credit was dealt with at the appropriate office, so the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jul 2018 08:53:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364292 Penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act cannot be sustained on wrongful availment of credit alone unless the record establishes fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, and on that basis the penalty was set aside. The disputed CENVAT credit also required factual verification of the invoices and related documents, including whether the invoices were properly addressed and credit was dealt with at the appropriate office, so the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh decision in accordance with law. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364292