https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787595 For the period from May 2013 to October 2015, Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 used permissive language for Input Service Distributor allocation, so proportionate turnover-based distribution was not mandatory; the credit distribution was therefore valid and the demand for alleged non-proportional distribution was not sustainable. Credit also could not be denied at the recipient unit's end when the distribution at the Input Service Distributor's end and the admissibility of the input services were not in dispute, because correctness of distribution had to be examined at the distributor's end. The demand, interest, and penalty were set aside. en-us Mon, 09 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Mar 2026 08:51:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787595 For the period from May 2013 to October 2015, Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 used permissive language for Input Service Distributor allocation, so proportionate turnover-based distribution was not mandatory; the credit distribution was therefore valid and the demand for alleged non-proportional distribution was not sustainable. Credit also could not be denied at the recipient unit's end when the distribution at the Input Service Distributor's end and the admissibility of the input services were not in dispute, because correctness of distribution had to be examined at the distributor's end. The demand, interest, and penalty were set aside. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 09 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787595