https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185944 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order denying cenvat credit on 'Outdoor Catering Services'. Citing precedents like Bell Ceramics Ltd. Vs. CCE, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's argument that the services were eligible as 'input services'. Relying on past cases, including Semco Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, the Tribunal emphasized consistency in allowing such credits. The decision reaffirms the significance of legal precedents in interpreting and applying laws, ensuring uniformity in outcomes. en-us Mon, 20 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Sep 2016 08:52:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185944 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order denying cenvat credit on 'Outdoor Catering Services'. Citing precedents like Bell Ceramics Ltd. Vs. CCE, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's argument that the services were eligible as 'input services'. Relying on past cases, including Semco Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CCE, the Tribunal emphasized consistency in allowing such credits. The decision reaffirms the significance of legal precedents in interpreting and applying laws, ensuring uniformity in outcomes. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 20 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185944