https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359456 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Vadodara. It held that construction services for repair and maintenance work inside factory premises post 1.4.2011 are admissible for CENVAT credit under the definition of 'input service'. The appellant's contention was supported by relevant invoices and a previous case precedent. The Revenue's argument that such services were excluded post 1.4.2011 was rejected. The decision was made by Dr. D. M. Misra, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) at the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 May 2018 06:21:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359456 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Appeal by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise, Vadodara. It held that construction services for repair and maintenance work inside factory premises post 1.4.2011 are admissible for CENVAT credit under the definition of 'input service'. The appellant's contention was supported by relevant invoices and a previous case precedent. The Revenue's argument that such services were excluded post 1.4.2011 was rejected. The decision was made by Dr. D. M. Misra, Hon'ble Member (Judicial) at the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359456