https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212663 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal and Commissioner (Appeals) findings that the services for which CENVAT credit was claimed by the assessee were pre-removal input services under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and not post-removal services. The court found no merit in the revenue's contention and concluded the assessee's claim for CENVAT credit was not erroneous, thereby affirming the lower authorities' orders. en-us Wed, 20 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Aug 2025 16:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212663 HC dismissed the revenue's appeal, upholding the Tribunal and Commissioner (Appeals) findings that the services for which CENVAT credit was claimed by the assessee were pre-removal input services under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and not post-removal services. The court found no merit in the revenue's contention and concluded the assessee's claim for CENVAT credit was not erroneous, thereby affirming the lower authorities' orders. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 20 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212663