https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445121 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Adjudicating Authority for further examination, focusing on the actual date of service receipt to determine the eligibility of cenvat credit. The Tribunal disagreed with the Authority's reasoning that credit availed after the omission of Rule 6(5) was inadmissible, emphasizing that credit should be allowed if services were received before the rule's omission. The appeal was allowed in this regard, requiring further consideration of the appellant's eligibility for re-credit based on the date of service receipt. en-us Tue, 31 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Nov 2023 08:46:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445121 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case to the Adjudicating Authority for further examination, focusing on the actual date of service receipt to determine the eligibility of cenvat credit. The Tribunal disagreed with the Authority's reasoning that credit availed after the omission of Rule 6(5) was inadmissible, emphasizing that credit should be allowed if services were received before the rule's omission. The appeal was allowed in this regard, requiring further consideration of the appellant's eligibility for re-credit based on the date of service receipt. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 31 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445121