https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310731 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that the appellant was not liable for a penalty concerning Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services, as the demand was made within the standard one-year period without evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. Although the appellant accepted the disallowance of Cenvat credit, the Tribunal set aside the penalty, citing conflicting views resolved by the Larger Bench in the Wipro Ltd. case. The demand for Cenvat credit and interest was upheld, but the penalty was waived, partially allowing the appeal. en-us Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Nov 2023 20:50:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310731 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled that the appellant was not liable for a penalty concerning Cenvat credit on outdoor catering services, as the demand was made within the standard one-year period without evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. Although the appellant accepted the disallowance of Cenvat credit, the Tribunal set aside the penalty, citing conflicting views resolved by the Larger Bench in the Wipro Ltd. case. The demand for Cenvat credit and interest was upheld, but the penalty was waived, partially allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 22 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310731