https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415117 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the decision confirming the demand for reversal of Cenvat credit, interest, and penalty. The dispute regarding whether the value of goods supplied in works contract execution should be treated as trading goods for calculating the reversal amount under Rule 6(3)(ii) of CCR was resolved in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal granted consequential benefits to the appellant, finding the inclusion of works contract goods in trading turnover as erroneous, and left the issue of limitation open while disposing of the miscellaneous application. en-us Wed, 27 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Nov 2021 08:45:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415117 The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the decision confirming the demand for reversal of Cenvat credit, interest, and penalty. The dispute regarding whether the value of goods supplied in works contract execution should be treated as trading goods for calculating the reversal amount under Rule 6(3)(ii) of CCR was resolved in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal granted consequential benefits to the appellant, finding the inclusion of works contract goods in trading turnover as erroneous, and left the issue of limitation open while disposing of the miscellaneous application. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 27 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415117