https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755470 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that appellant providing stock brokerage and financial services was entitled to CENVAT Credit on input services despite also conducting proprietary trading. The tribunal found that proprietary trading was not an output service as it wasn't provided to others, and Rule 6(3) wasn't invoked for credit recovery. Since appellant disclosed credit details in monthly returns and no suppression occurred, the demand was time-barred. The tribunal concluded no machinery provision existed for credit recovery under these circumstances, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. en-us Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jul 2024 08:19:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755470 CESTAT Ahmedabad held that appellant providing stock brokerage and financial services was entitled to CENVAT Credit on input services despite also conducting proprietary trading. The tribunal found that proprietary trading was not an output service as it wasn't provided to others, and Rule 6(3) wasn't invoked for credit recovery. Since appellant disclosed credit details in monthly returns and no suppression occurred, the demand was time-barred. The tribunal concluded no machinery provision existed for credit recovery under these circumstances, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755470