Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
