https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405873 CENVAT credit on supplementary invoices remained admissible because the bar under Rule 9(1)(bb) applies only where the additional tax is recoverable from the service provider on grounds of fraud, suppression, wilful misstatement or similar evasion. No show-cause notice had been issued to the service provider and no adjudication had invoked the extended-recovery proviso under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The service tax had been paid after advice from the jurisdictional officer, and the cited service tax and point-of-taxation rules were held inapplicable to the recipient. Credit was therefore allowed and denial of credit was unsustainable. en-us Mon, 29 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Aug 2021 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405873 CENVAT credit on supplementary invoices remained admissible because the bar under Rule 9(1)(bb) applies only where the additional tax is recoverable from the service provider on grounds of fraud, suppression, wilful misstatement or similar evasion. No show-cause notice had been issued to the service provider and no adjudication had invoked the extended-recovery proviso under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994. The service tax had been paid after advice from the jurisdictional officer, and the cited service tax and point-of-taxation rules were held inapplicable to the recipient. Credit was therefore allowed and denial of credit was unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 29 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405873