https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377488 Service tax liability is treated as discharged only when the CENVAT credit adjustment is actually made and reflected; the mere availability of sufficient credit does not avoid interest under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 on delayed payment. Non-payment detected in audit supported invocation of the extended period of limitation. However, where the principal tax was paid before the show cause notice and part of the interest had also been discharged, equal penalty under section 78 was not warranted on the facts, and the penalty was set aside. The interest demand was sustained and the limitation challenge failed, but the penalty was deleted. en-us Wed, 30 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 May 2025 10:43:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377488 Service tax liability is treated as discharged only when the CENVAT credit adjustment is actually made and reflected; the mere availability of sufficient credit does not avoid interest under section 75 of the Finance Act, 1994 on delayed payment. Non-payment detected in audit supported invocation of the extended period of limitation. However, where the principal tax was paid before the show cause notice and part of the interest had also been discharged, equal penalty under section 78 was not warranted on the facts, and the penalty was set aside. The interest demand was sustained and the limitation challenge failed, but the penalty was deleted. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 30 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377488