https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370880 The Tribunal upheld the adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner, finding it within jurisdiction as authorized by Circular No.1053/2/2017-CX. Regarding CENVAT credit eligibility, the appellant's failure to demonstrate separate accounts for common input services led to upholding the demand. Despite maintaining registers for traded goods, the penalty was deemed unwarranted and set aside, while duty and interest remained unchanged. The penalty imposition was found unjustified due to the appellant's compliance with maintaining registers for traded goods without claiming credit, resulting in the denial of their challenge against the CENVAT credit demand. en-us Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:56:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370880 The Tribunal upheld the adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner, finding it within jurisdiction as authorized by Circular No.1053/2/2017-CX. Regarding CENVAT credit eligibility, the appellant's failure to demonstrate separate accounts for common input services led to upholding the demand. Despite maintaining registers for traded goods, the penalty was deemed unwarranted and set aside, while duty and interest remained unchanged. The penalty imposition was found unjustified due to the appellant's compliance with maintaining registers for traded goods without claiming credit, resulting in the denial of their challenge against the CENVAT credit demand. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 07 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370880