https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370003 Cenvat credit was admissible on duty paid by indigenous suppliers to a 100% EOU because the duty was actually paid, and credit could not be denied merely on the ground that exemption may have been available to the supplier; the related demand and penalty were set aside. By contrast, credit on service tax later disclosed under the VCES scheme was denied because the disclosure reflected prior non-payment amounting to suppression or misstatement, so the corresponding demand and interest were upheld. Penalty on this second issue was nevertheless deleted as the dispute was interpretative and no mala fides were established. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:54:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370003 Cenvat credit was admissible on duty paid by indigenous suppliers to a 100% EOU because the duty was actually paid, and credit could not be denied merely on the ground that exemption may have been available to the supplier; the related demand and penalty were set aside. By contrast, credit on service tax later disclosed under the VCES scheme was denied because the disclosure reflected prior non-payment amounting to suppression or misstatement, so the corresponding demand and interest were upheld. Penalty on this second issue was nevertheless deleted as the dispute was interpretative and no mala fides were established. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370003