https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759624 Adjudication cannot sustain denial of CENVAT credit on grounds not alleged in the show cause notice; credits for infrastructure development service and the related disputed amounts were set aside because the demand was based on different reasoning and the asserted works-contract basis was not established. Credits for roads and landscape maintenance, an SEZ invoice, and services used exclusively for trading were denied because they lacked nexus with the output service or were otherwise ineligible, and those demands were sustained. The extended period of limitation was held invocable where eligible credit was not properly established or disclosed, and penalty survived only to the extent the corresponding demand remained valid. en-us Fri, 04 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Oct 2024 08:54:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759624 Adjudication cannot sustain denial of CENVAT credit on grounds not alleged in the show cause notice; credits for infrastructure development service and the related disputed amounts were set aside because the demand was based on different reasoning and the asserted works-contract basis was not established. Credits for roads and landscape maintenance, an SEZ invoice, and services used exclusively for trading were denied because they lacked nexus with the output service or were otherwise ineligible, and those demands were sustained. The extended period of limitation was held invocable where eligible credit was not properly established or disclosed, and penalty survived only to the extent the corresponding demand remained valid. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 04 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759624