https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394164 The denial of cenvat credit under Rule 9(1)(bb) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was overturned by the Member (Judicial) as suppression of facts by the service providers was not proven. The absence of formal proceedings against the service providers, such as a show cause notice or adjudication order, led to the conclusion that Rule 9(1)(bb) did not apply. The appellant successfully argued that without proper legal actions against the service providers, the denial of cenvat credit was unjustified. Consequently, the appellant was granted the cenvat credit, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Apr 2020 11:09:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394164 The denial of cenvat credit under Rule 9(1)(bb) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was overturned by the Member (Judicial) as suppression of facts by the service providers was not proven. The absence of formal proceedings against the service providers, such as a show cause notice or adjudication order, led to the conclusion that Rule 9(1)(bb) did not apply. The appellant successfully argued that without proper legal actions against the service providers, the denial of cenvat credit was unjustified. Consequently, the appellant was granted the cenvat credit, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 29 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394164