https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766805 Cenvat credit on outdoor catering service was held inadmissible for the period after 01.04.2011 because the amended Rule 2(l) excluded that service from the definition of input service, and the statutory canteen obligation under the Factories Act did not override the exclusion. Interest on reversal of the disputed credit was not sustainable where sufficient unutilised Cenvat credit balance was available and the credit had not caused loss to the exchequer. Penalty under Rule 15(1) was also found unjustified because the dispute was purely interpretational and earlier proceedings had treated the issue on that basis. The credit demand was maintained, but interest and penalty did not survive. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Mar 2025 07:49:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766805 Cenvat credit on outdoor catering service was held inadmissible for the period after 01.04.2011 because the amended Rule 2(l) excluded that service from the definition of input service, and the statutory canteen obligation under the Factories Act did not override the exclusion. Interest on reversal of the disputed credit was not sustainable where sufficient unutilised Cenvat credit balance was available and the credit had not caused loss to the exchequer. Penalty under Rule 15(1) was also found unjustified because the dispute was purely interpretational and earlier proceedings had treated the issue on that basis. The credit demand was maintained, but interest and penalty did not survive. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766805