https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751147 CESTAT Chandigarh allowed appellant's appeal against CENVAT credit recovery demand. Tribunal held that retrospective amendment via Finance Act 2012 exempted services to SEZ from Rule 6 limitations, entitling appellant to full credit. Demand based on balance sheet figures without identifying actual service transactions was deemed improper. Regarding associated enterprise expenses, no immediate service tax payment was required upon booking entries. Extended limitation period was not applicable as department failed to establish grounds. Interest demand was unsustainable since appellant paid service tax before show cause notice. Main demand being unsustainable, penalty question did not arise. Impugned order set aside completely. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Apr 2024 15:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751147 CESTAT Chandigarh allowed appellant's appeal against CENVAT credit recovery demand. Tribunal held that retrospective amendment via Finance Act 2012 exempted services to SEZ from Rule 6 limitations, entitling appellant to full credit. Demand based on balance sheet figures without identifying actual service transactions was deemed improper. Regarding associated enterprise expenses, no immediate service tax payment was required upon booking entries. Extended limitation period was not applicable as department failed to establish grounds. Interest demand was unsustainable since appellant paid service tax before show cause notice. Main demand being unsustainable, penalty question did not arise. Impugned order set aside completely. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751147