https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405829 A demand for reversal of proportionate CENVAT credit could not be sustained merely because the assessee did not produce the workings for the amount reversed. The department did not dispute that the actual reversal was correct or allege that any further amount was payable. In the absence of a specific allegation of non-compliance with the procedural intimation requirement under Rule 6(3A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the demand failed because there was no proof that the reversal made was wrong. en-us Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Nov 2021 12:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405829 A demand for reversal of proportionate CENVAT credit could not be sustained merely because the assessee did not produce the workings for the amount reversed. The department did not dispute that the actual reversal was correct or allege that any further amount was payable. In the absence of a specific allegation of non-compliance with the procedural intimation requirement under Rule 6(3A) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, the demand failed because there was no proof that the reversal made was wrong. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405829