https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774283 CENVAT credit was admissible for services received through a sub-contractor where the assessee had assigned work under a principal work order, the work was shown as executed, and a completion certificate had been issued; the record did not disprove receipt of services or show that the work was not executed on the assessee's behalf, so credit could not be denied. Penalties founded solely on that denial also could not survive, because once the credit disallowance failed, the basis for penalty ceased to exist. en-us Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jul 2025 08:42:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774283 CENVAT credit was admissible for services received through a sub-contractor where the assessee had assigned work under a principal work order, the work was shown as executed, and a completion certificate had been issued; the record did not disprove receipt of services or show that the work was not executed on the assessee's behalf, so credit could not be denied. Penalties founded solely on that denial also could not survive, because once the credit disallowance failed, the basis for penalty ceased to exist. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774283