https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381884 Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was treated as applicable to an input service distributor, because the Rule's non-obstante protection for specified input services is not excluded by the distribution mechanism under Rule 7. On that basis, credit on covered services could not be denied merely because the assessee functioned as an input service distributor. However, the duty calculation on the available record was found inconsistent and required re-examination, so the quantification of liability was remanded. The penalty based on the disputed interpretation was not sustained in view of the uncertainty in the duty computation and the legal position on Rule 6(5). en-us Thu, 20 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Jun 2019 08:53:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381884 Rule 6(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was treated as applicable to an input service distributor, because the Rule's non-obstante protection for specified input services is not excluded by the distribution mechanism under Rule 7. On that basis, credit on covered services could not be denied merely because the assessee functioned as an input service distributor. However, the duty calculation on the available record was found inconsistent and required re-examination, so the quantification of liability was remanded. The penalty based on the disputed interpretation was not sustained in view of the uncertainty in the duty computation and the legal position on Rule 6(5). Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 20 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381884