https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362769 The department's appeals against the Commissioner (Appeals) order, which granted the refund claim to the respondent, were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the decision, ruling in favor of the respondent on various grounds, including the absence of a time bar for refund claims, eligibility for credit before premises registration, exclusion of SEZ units turnover, and credit eligibility for Rent-a-cab and outdoor catering services. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly applied relevant case laws and precedents in granting the refund to the respondent, a 100% EOU, under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Jun 2019 11:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362769 The department's appeals against the Commissioner (Appeals) order, which granted the refund claim to the respondent, were dismissed. The Tribunal upheld the decision, ruling in favor of the respondent on various grounds, including the absence of a time bar for refund claims, eligibility for credit before premises registration, exclusion of SEZ units turnover, and credit eligibility for Rent-a-cab and outdoor catering services. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner (Appeals) correctly applied relevant case laws and precedents in granting the refund to the respondent, a 100% EOU, under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 16 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362769