https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364761 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, confirming the appellant's entitlement to Cenvat credit. It held that procedural lapses should not result in denial of substantive benefits, finding no wrongful utilization of credits before service tax payment. Interest was deemed inapplicable as credits remained unutilized. The imposition of penalties under Rule 15 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was unjustified due to the absence of intent to evade duty and correct subsequent utilization of credits. The decision underscored the significance of substantive compliance over procedural formalities. en-us Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Aug 2018 08:28:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364761 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, confirming the appellant's entitlement to Cenvat credit. It held that procedural lapses should not result in denial of substantive benefits, finding no wrongful utilization of credits before service tax payment. Interest was deemed inapplicable as credits remained unutilized. The imposition of penalties under Rule 15 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was unjustified due to the absence of intent to evade duty and correct subsequent utilization of credits. The decision underscored the significance of substantive compliance over procedural formalities. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364761