<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (1) TMI 610 - CESTAT BANGALORE (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242391</link>
    <description>Input service credit under Rule 2(l) was examined by applying the inclusive definition and the test of an integral nexus with the business of manufacture. Services not directly used in production could still qualify if shown to be business-related, so several disputed items were remanded for fresh factual verification. Club association service was treated as a welfare or personal benefit, not an activity relating to business, and credit on that service was denied. The jurisdiction objection concerning adjudication of credit distributed through the head office as input service distributor was also left for fresh determination. The impugned order was set aside in part, penalties were vacated, and surviving credit disputes were remanded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 610 - CESTAT BANGALORE (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242391</link>
      <description>Input service credit under Rule 2(l) was examined by applying the inclusive definition and the test of an integral nexus with the business of manufacture. Services not directly used in production could still qualify if shown to be business-related, so several disputed items were remanded for fresh factual verification. Club association service was treated as a welfare or personal benefit, not an activity relating to business, and credit on that service was denied. The jurisdiction objection concerning adjudication of credit distributed through the head office as input service distributor was also left for fresh determination. The impugned order was set aside in part, penalties were vacated, and surviving credit disputes were remanded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>