https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233535 The appellate tribunal upheld the first authority's decision, emphasizing the eligibility of cenvat credit for handling agency services indirectly related to manufacturing and export activities. Citing relevant judicial precedents, including a case involving CCE, Rajkot v/s. Rolex Rings P.Ltd, and the decision of the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) in Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., the tribunal affirmed the broad interpretation of "input service" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appeal was rejected, confirming the legality of the order demanding the reversal of wrongly availed credit, with no procedural or legal flaws noted. en-us Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 May 2013 18:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233535 The appellate tribunal upheld the first authority's decision, emphasizing the eligibility of cenvat credit for handling agency services indirectly related to manufacturing and export activities. Citing relevant judicial precedents, including a case involving CCE, Rajkot v/s. Rolex Rings P.Ltd, and the decision of the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) in Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur vs. Ultratech Cement Ltd., the tribunal affirmed the broad interpretation of "input service" under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appeal was rejected, confirming the legality of the order demanding the reversal of wrongly availed credit, with no procedural or legal flaws noted. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233535