https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443836 The text explains that in a service tax dispute, ineligible CENVAT credit could not be insisted upon for appropriation where the credit related to services not received and the debit discrepancy remained unresolved. It further states that payment of tax and interest before notice did not attract Section 73(3) protection where the demand proceeded on suppression with intent to evade under Section 73(4), so penalty relief on that basis was unavailable. It also notes that Section 80 relief requires credible proof of reasonable cause; unsupported claims of financial difficulty, especially where tax was collected from customers, returns were delayed, and dues were undisclosed, were insufficient. en-us Fri, 15 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Oct 2023 07:16:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443836 The text explains that in a service tax dispute, ineligible CENVAT credit could not be insisted upon for appropriation where the credit related to services not received and the debit discrepancy remained unresolved. It further states that payment of tax and interest before notice did not attract Section 73(3) protection where the demand proceeded on suppression with intent to evade under Section 73(4), so penalty relief on that basis was unavailable. It also notes that Section 80 relief requires credible proof of reasonable cause; unsupported claims of financial difficulty, especially where tax was collected from customers, returns were delayed, and dues were undisclosed, were insufficient. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 15 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443836