https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775473 The CESTAT Kolkata held that denial of CENVAT credit on the ground of territorial jurisdiction was incorrect, as there is no such restriction under Rule 7 and Rule 9(2) of the CCR, 2004. The demand of Rs. 4.71 crore for credit wrongly distributed was set aside, along with related interest and penalty. The demand of service tax on GTA services was partly reduced based on CA certification, and the balance demand, interest, and penalty were quashed. Penalty imposed on paid R&D cess and GTA service tax was also set aside since payment was made before the show cause notice. The appeal was allowed, and all demands, interest, and penalties confirmed in the impugned order except the adjusted service tax portion were set aside. en-us Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jul 2025 08:39:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775473 The CESTAT Kolkata held that denial of CENVAT credit on the ground of territorial jurisdiction was incorrect, as there is no such restriction under Rule 7 and Rule 9(2) of the CCR, 2004. The demand of Rs. 4.71 crore for credit wrongly distributed was set aside, along with related interest and penalty. The demand of service tax on GTA services was partly reduced based on CA certification, and the balance demand, interest, and penalty were quashed. Penalty imposed on paid R&D cess and GTA service tax was also set aside since payment was made before the show cause notice. The appeal was allowed, and all demands, interest, and penalties confirmed in the impugned order except the adjusted service tax portion were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 23 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775473