https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765463 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging disallowance of CENVAT credit. The tribunal held that the adjudicating authority cannot confirm demand on grounds not mentioned in the show-cause notice. The original SCN alleged mismatch of figures in ST-3 returns for specific periods, but the impugned order disallowed credit on grounds that disputed services did not conform to input service definition - a ground not raised in the SCN. Citing SC precedents in Ballarpur Industries and Toyo Engineering cases, CESTAT ruled that demands confirmed on new grounds beyond the SCN scope cannot be sustained and set aside the demand. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Feb 2025 08:41:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765463 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging disallowance of CENVAT credit. The tribunal held that the adjudicating authority cannot confirm demand on grounds not mentioned in the show-cause notice. The original SCN alleged mismatch of figures in ST-3 returns for specific periods, but the impugned order disallowed credit on grounds that disputed services did not conform to input service definition - a ground not raised in the SCN. Citing SC precedents in Ballarpur Industries and Toyo Engineering cases, CESTAT ruled that demands confirmed on new grounds beyond the SCN scope cannot be sustained and set aside the demand. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 25 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765463