https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189348 The appeal regarding the admissibility of CENVAT credit for service tax paid on transportation services was dismissed by the CESTAT. The respondents, glass manufacturers, were allowed credit based on the terms of delivery being "FOR destination." The interpretation of Rule 2(1)(ii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was crucial, with the Division Bench relying on precedents to support the admissibility of credit for outward transportation services. The dismissal was in line with previous rulings, emphasizing no substantial legal question necessitated consideration, resulting in the appeal being dismissed without costs. en-us Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jan 2017 13:30:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189348 The appeal regarding the admissibility of CENVAT credit for service tax paid on transportation services was dismissed by the CESTAT. The respondents, glass manufacturers, were allowed credit based on the terms of delivery being "FOR destination." The interpretation of Rule 2(1)(ii) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was crucial, with the Division Bench relying on precedents to support the admissibility of credit for outward transportation services. The dismissal was in line with previous rulings, emphasizing no substantial legal question necessitated consideration, resulting in the appeal being dismissed without costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 08 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189348