https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757014 Adjustment of excess service tax paid on exported services against inadmissible cenvat credit on inputs cleared as such was not permissible under Rule 6(3), because the two amounts did not arise from the same statutory basis. However, recovery of the disputed credit could not be sustained for the relevant period as no valid recovery mechanism existed until the amendment notified on 01.03.2013. On limitation, the Department's continuing correspondence and prior interest payment showed awareness of the material facts, so suppression was not established and the extended period was unavailable. Demand, interest, and penalty were therefore set aside. en-us Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2024 08:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757014 Adjustment of excess service tax paid on exported services against inadmissible cenvat credit on inputs cleared as such was not permissible under Rule 6(3), because the two amounts did not arise from the same statutory basis. However, recovery of the disputed credit could not be sustained for the relevant period as no valid recovery mechanism existed until the amendment notified on 01.03.2013. On limitation, the Department's continuing correspondence and prior interest payment showed awareness of the material facts, so suppression was not established and the extended period was unavailable. Demand, interest, and penalty were therefore set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 09 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757014