https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449814 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that dropping demand of Rs. 59,32,265/- for excess 20% credit utilization under Rule 6(3)(c) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was proper, as post-amendment in 2008, such restrictions were removed making the demand purposeless. However, service tax demand of Rs. 72,18,957/- on common input services used for both taxable and exempted activities (trading) was upheld on merits, but limited to normal period due to lack of suppression evidence. The assessee failed to establish separate usage documentation for common services. Appeal partly allowed with demand restricted to normal limitation period. en-us Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Feb 2024 18:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449814 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that dropping demand of Rs. 59,32,265/- for excess 20% credit utilization under Rule 6(3)(c) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was proper, as post-amendment in 2008, such restrictions were removed making the demand purposeless. However, service tax demand of Rs. 72,18,957/- on common input services used for both taxable and exempted activities (trading) was upheld on merits, but limited to normal period due to lack of suppression evidence. The assessee failed to establish separate usage documentation for common services. Appeal partly allowed with demand restricted to normal limitation period. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 19 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449814