TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal allows credit for service tax on Catering, Cab, and Rental Charges</h1> <h3>M/s. Chennai Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai</h3> M/s. Chennai Container Terminal Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of GST & CE, Chennai - 2022 (58) G. S. T. L. 359 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues: Disallowance of credit on service tax paid for Outdoor Catering Services, Rent-a-Cab Services, and Rental Charges for office in Mumbai.In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, the appellant filed an appeal against the disallowance of credit availed on service tax paid for various services, including Outdoor Catering Services, Rent-a-Cab Services, and Rental Charges for their office in Mumbai. The appellant's counsel argued that in a previous case for a different period, the Tribunal had allowed credit for Outdoor Catering Service and Rent-a-Cab Service. Regarding the Rental Charges for their Mumbai office, the original authority had allowed the credit, but the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowed it. The appellant contended that since the premises were used for administrative functions, the credit should be allowed. The invoices were in the name of the company, indicating the premises were used for company-related activities. The department argued against allowing credit for the rental charges paid for the Mumbai office. After hearing both sides, the Tribunal noted that credit had been denied for Outdoor Catering Service and Rent-a-Cab Service, which were previously allowed in a different case. The issue of eligibility for credit on service tax paid for rental charges was also considered. The Tribunal found that the disallowance of credit on these input services was unjustified as the premises were used for business activities, and the invoices were in the name of the appellant-Company. Therefore, the disallowance of credit for all three services was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential reliefs, if any.
TaxTMI 