https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328970 The appellant, engaged in BPO services, challenged the rejection of a refund claim for unutilized CENVAT credit. The court analyzed various input services and held most of them eligible for refund, including manpower recruitment, renovation works, training programs, security services, internet and telecommunication services, legal services, and more. The court allowed the refund on renting of immovable property, excluding common area maintenance charges. The appeal was partially allowed, granting the appellant relief on eligible services while upholding the exclusion of common area maintenance charges. en-us Tue, 26 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2017 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328970 The appellant, engaged in BPO services, challenged the rejection of a refund claim for unutilized CENVAT credit. The court analyzed various input services and held most of them eligible for refund, including manpower recruitment, renovation works, training programs, security services, internet and telecommunication services, legal services, and more. The court allowed the refund on renting of immovable property, excluding common area maintenance charges. The appeal was partially allowed, granting the appellant relief on eligible services while upholding the exclusion of common area maintenance charges. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 26 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328970