https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379741 The appellant challenged the inadmissibility of CENVAT credit on various services from April 2008 to March 2013. The Adjudicating Authority imposed duty liability, interest, and penalties, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) except for the penalty under Section 76. The Tribunal found the appellant failed to establish the correlation between input and output services. The appellant's submission that services were for Market Research Services and not personal use was considered. The Tribunal remanded the case for re-adjudication, emphasizing the need for proper documentation to establish CENVAT credit eligibility. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 May 2019 08:21:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379741 The appellant challenged the inadmissibility of CENVAT credit on various services from April 2008 to March 2013. The Adjudicating Authority imposed duty liability, interest, and penalties, upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) except for the penalty under Section 76. The Tribunal found the appellant failed to establish the correlation between input and output services. The appellant's submission that services were for Market Research Services and not personal use was considered. The Tribunal remanded the case for re-adjudication, emphasizing the need for proper documentation to establish CENVAT credit eligibility. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379741