Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Eligibility of claiming CENVAT credit for service tax paid on renting immovable property services. The lower authority denied the credit, considering it as a service related to setting up premises, which was removed from the definition of input service u/r 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.03.2011. However, the Tribunal held that renting immovable property service is directly used for providing the output service, and hence covered under the main clause of the input service definition. The exclusion of "setting up" from the inclusion clause does not impact this, as the inclusion clause is merely clarificatory. The Tribunal relied on the NAVIN FLOURINE case, which allowed CENVAT credit for such services, as they were used in relation to manufacturing the final product. Since renting immovable property service is not covered under the exclusion clause, even after 01.04.2011, it continued to be an admissible input service for availing CENVAT credit. Consequently, the demand for denying CENVAT credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Eligibility of claiming CENVAT credit for service tax paid on renting immovable property services. The lower authority denied the credit, considering it as a service related to setting up premises, which was removed from the definition of input service u/r 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.03.2011. However, the Tribunal held that renting immovable property service is directly used for providing the output service, and hence covered under the main clause of the input service definition. The exclusion of "setting up" from the inclusion clause does not impact this, as the inclusion clause is merely clarificatory. The Tribunal relied on the NAVIN FLOURINE case, which allowed CENVAT credit for such services, as they were used in relation to manufacturing the final product. Since renting immovable property service is not covered under the exclusion clause, even after 01.04.2011, it continued to be an admissible input service for availing CENVAT credit. Consequently, the demand for denying CENVAT credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
