https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356257 The Tribunal set aside the demand of cenvat credit wrongly availed by the appellant for the period in question, ruling in favor of the appellant based on legal interpretations and established case law. The Tribunal found that the appellant was entitled to avail credit of service tax paid by sub-contractors as input service, in line with Rule 2(l)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and supported by relevant judicial precedents. The impugned order was deemed unsustainable in law, leading to the allowance of the appellant's appeal with consequential relief. en-us Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Mar 2018 10:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356257 The Tribunal set aside the demand of cenvat credit wrongly availed by the appellant for the period in question, ruling in favor of the appellant based on legal interpretations and established case law. The Tribunal found that the appellant was entitled to avail credit of service tax paid by sub-contractors as input service, in line with Rule 2(l)(i) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and supported by relevant judicial precedents. The impugned order was deemed unsustainable in law, leading to the allowance of the appellant's appeal with consequential relief. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 07 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356257