https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780018 CESTAT KOLKATA (AT) allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the confirmed demand of Rs.34,63,730 with interest and penalty. The tribunal found CENVAT credit reversal was not calculated as required by Rule 6(3A) CCR, 2004, and the mandatory pre-consultation procedure under Board Circulars was not followed, violating principles of natural justice. The later Circular of 11.11.2021 could not be given retrospective effect to cure the procedural lapse, so the recovery was quashed. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 08:08:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780018 CESTAT KOLKATA (AT) allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the confirmed demand of Rs.34,63,730 with interest and penalty. The tribunal found CENVAT credit reversal was not calculated as required by Rule 6(3A) CCR, 2004, and the mandatory pre-consultation procedure under Board Circulars was not followed, violating principles of natural justice. The later Circular of 11.11.2021 could not be given retrospective effect to cure the procedural lapse, so the recovery was quashed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780018