https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250788 CENVAT credit was treated as usable for payment of service tax under reverse charge on Insurance Auxiliary Service because a person liable to pay tax under reverse charge is deemed to be the provider of the output service. The Tribunal noted that the omission of the Explanation to Rule 2(p) did not change the meaning of "output service", "provider of taxable service" or "person liable for paying service tax", and that no one-to-one correlation is required between input and output services under the CENVAT scheme. It also held that the 20% utilisation cap in Rule 6(3)(c) did not apply where the service fell within Rule 6(5), making the demand unsustainable. en-us Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jan 2015 10:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250788 CENVAT credit was treated as usable for payment of service tax under reverse charge on Insurance Auxiliary Service because a person liable to pay tax under reverse charge is deemed to be the provider of the output service. The Tribunal noted that the omission of the Explanation to Rule 2(p) did not change the meaning of "output service", "provider of taxable service" or "person liable for paying service tax", and that no one-to-one correlation is required between input and output services under the CENVAT scheme. It also held that the 20% utilisation cap in Rule 6(3)(c) did not apply where the service fell within Rule 6(5), making the demand unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 24 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250788