https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759407 Common input-service credit distributed through an Input Service Distributor was held to remain available where the services fell within the inclusive limb of the definition of input service, and the second proviso to Rule 3(4) was confined to the specific class of services used in manufacture of final products cleared under the notified area-based exemption. The recipient unit was not required to verify the distributor's internal allocation, and credit could not be denied merely because the distributor had apportioned credit to other units. The extended limitation period was unavailable because returns disclosed the credit position and no suppression with intent to evade duty was shown; interest and penalty therefore also did not survive. en-us Fri, 27 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759407 Common input-service credit distributed through an Input Service Distributor was held to remain available where the services fell within the inclusive limb of the definition of input service, and the second proviso to Rule 3(4) was confined to the specific class of services used in manufacture of final products cleared under the notified area-based exemption. The recipient unit was not required to verify the distributor's internal allocation, and credit could not be denied merely because the distributor had apportioned credit to other units. The extended limitation period was unavailable because returns disclosed the credit position and no suppression with intent to evade duty was shown; interest and penalty therefore also did not survive. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759407