https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362874 CENVAT credit on franchisee-related services was disputed as being restricted to 20% under Rule 6(3) of the CCR versus full credit. Applying the CESTAT ruling that identical services from the same provider constituted management consultancy, the Tribunal held the recipient entitled to 100% credit of service tax paid, and set aside the restriction. Demand on mandap keeper services, where tax was paid after 60% abatement without availing CENVAT credit, turned on factual verification; the demand was set aside and remanded for verification. Demands on shop/showcase rental, business centre income, health club services, and tower rental were also remanded for verification of the assessee's plea of tax already discharged under other taxable heads. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 19:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362874 CENVAT credit on franchisee-related services was disputed as being restricted to 20% under Rule 6(3) of the CCR versus full credit. Applying the CESTAT ruling that identical services from the same provider constituted management consultancy, the Tribunal held the recipient entitled to 100% credit of service tax paid, and set aside the restriction. Demand on mandap keeper services, where tax was paid after 60% abatement without availing CENVAT credit, turned on factual verification; the demand was set aside and remanded for verification. Demands on shop/showcase rental, business centre income, health club services, and tower rental were also remanded for verification of the assessee's plea of tax already discharged under other taxable heads. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 02 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362874