https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378455 The appellant was engaged in manufacturing dutiable goods and providing exempted job work services. The appellant was found ineligible for CENVAT Credit due to common input services unless separate accounts were maintained. The appellant failed to comply with Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, leading to a demand for recovery. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that their manufacturing activities did not constitute an exempted service. The demand raised by the Department was deemed unsustainable, and the appellant's appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs as per law. en-us Fri, 12 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378455 The appellant was engaged in manufacturing dutiable goods and providing exempted job work services. The appellant was found ineligible for CENVAT Credit due to common input services unless separate accounts were maintained. The appellant failed to comply with Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, leading to a demand for recovery. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that their manufacturing activities did not constitute an exempted service. The demand raised by the Department was deemed unsustainable, and the appellant's appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs as per law. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 12 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378455