https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783017 The CESTAT, New Delhi allowed the appeal and set aside the Commissioner's order demanding recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty. Relying on a prior Division Bench ruling, the Tribunal held that subscription and redemption of mutual fund units do not constitute sale or purchase of securities and therefore do not qualify as "trading in securities" or an exempted service under section 66D(e) of the Finance Act. Consequently, the assessee was not required to make any proportionate reversal of CENVAT credit. The Tribunal further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under the proviso to section 73(1) was unsustainable. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Dec 2025 08:41:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783017 The CESTAT, New Delhi allowed the appeal and set aside the Commissioner's order demanding recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty. Relying on a prior Division Bench ruling, the Tribunal held that subscription and redemption of mutual fund units do not constitute sale or purchase of securities and therefore do not qualify as "trading in securities" or an exempted service under section 66D(e) of the Finance Act. Consequently, the assessee was not required to make any proportionate reversal of CENVAT credit. The Tribunal further held that invocation of the extended period of limitation under the proviso to section 73(1) was unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783017