<?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 (8) TMI 1371 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191162</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit was examined for employee catering under a statutory canteen facility and for tent, design, supply and erection services used for storage protection and pipeline rerouting. Credit on catering service depended on verification of the actual cost recovered from employees, because the records showed subsidised recovery and the factual incidence of the expense required confirmation; the claim was therefore remanded for limited verification. Credit on tent service and the related design, supply and erection services was allowed because those services had a clear nexus with manufacture and plant operations, including protection of raw materials during the monsoon and expansion-related rerouting work, and were treated as input services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 23:17:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=462145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 1371 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191162</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit was examined for employee catering under a statutory canteen facility and for tent, design, supply and erection services used for storage protection and pipeline rerouting. Credit on catering service depended on verification of the actual cost recovered from employees, because the records showed subsidised recovery and the factual incidence of the expense required confirmation; the claim was therefore remanded for limited verification. Credit on tent service and the related design, supply and erection services was allowed because those services had a clear nexus with manufacture and plant operations, including protection of raw materials during the monsoon and expansion-related rerouting work, and were treated as input services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>