https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772730 CESTAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of CENVAT credit for service tax paid on employee transportation and canteen services. The tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked as the appellant had no obligation to provide detailed nature of input services in returns under Central Excise Rules. The Deputy Commissioner erred in concluding that non-disclosure of specific credit details constituted suppression of facts. Since returns were filed and department officers failed to scrutinize them timely, fault lay with officers, not the assessee. No legal presumption exists that failure to seek departmental clarification indicates deliberate wrongful credit availment. Penalty under section 11AC was also set aside. en-us Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Jun 2026 13:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772730 CESTAT Hyderabad allowed the appeal, setting aside the denial of CENVAT credit for service tax paid on employee transportation and canteen services. The tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked as the appellant had no obligation to provide detailed nature of input services in returns under Central Excise Rules. The Deputy Commissioner erred in concluding that non-disclosure of specific credit details constituted suppression of facts. Since returns were filed and department officers failed to scrutinize them timely, fault lay with officers, not the assessee. No legal presumption exists that failure to seek departmental clarification indicates deliberate wrongful credit availment. Penalty under section 11AC was also set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772730