https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779940 CESTAT held that the respondent was a paper entity issuing bogus invoices but had not actually rendered taxable services, so service-tax demands premised on presumed transactions could not be sustained. Section 73A required proof of amounts collected as service tax; only Rs.1,53,40,510 had been shown collected and paid, and any demand beyond that was unsupportable. The large demand of Rs.16,52,11,235 was rightly dropped. Irregular CENVAT credit, being unusable where no tax liability existed, did not give rise to recovery here. Appeal by Revenue dismissed. en-us Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Oct 2025 08:30:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779940 CESTAT held that the respondent was a paper entity issuing bogus invoices but had not actually rendered taxable services, so service-tax demands premised on presumed transactions could not be sustained. Section 73A required proof of amounts collected as service tax; only Rs.1,53,40,510 had been shown collected and paid, and any demand beyond that was unsupportable. The large demand of Rs.16,52,11,235 was rightly dropped. Irregular CENVAT credit, being unusable where no tax liability existed, did not give rise to recovery here. Appeal by Revenue dismissed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 14 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779940