<?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>2015 (11) TMI 724 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267915</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing them to avail CENVAT credit for services related to &#039;renting of immovable property&#039; and &#039;leasing of vacant land&#039; in the context of providing port services. The Tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s argument of maintaining separate accounts for exempted and dutiable final services, permitting the reversal of proportionate credit for common input services. The Tribunal disagreed with the Revenue&#039;s insistence on restricting credit to 20% due to the absence of separate cenvatable accounts, remanding the matter for re-decision by the original adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2015 10:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=405396" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 724 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267915</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing them to avail CENVAT credit for services related to &#039;renting of immovable property&#039; and &#039;leasing of vacant land&#039; in the context of providing port services. The Tribunal accepted the appellant&#039;s argument of maintaining separate accounts for exempted and dutiable final services, permitting the reversal of proportionate credit for common input services. The Tribunal disagreed with the Revenue&#039;s insistence on restricting credit to 20% due to the absence of separate cenvatable accounts, remanding the matter for re-decision by the original adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267915</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>