<?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>2018 (5) TMI 24 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359460</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the sales commission paid to commission agents was eligible for CENVAT credit as it constituted sales promotion activity linked to increasing manufacturing. The Explanation added to the definition of &quot;input service&quot; was deemed retrospective, following the Essar Steels India Pvt. Ltd. precedent. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing the importance of judicial precedents in interpreting statutory definitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2018 06:21:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518559" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 24 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359460</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the sales commission paid to commission agents was eligible for CENVAT credit as it constituted sales promotion activity linked to increasing manufacturing. The Explanation added to the definition of &quot;input service&quot; was deemed retrospective, following the Essar Steels India Pvt. Ltd. precedent. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing the importance of judicial precedents in interpreting statutory definitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>