https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363029 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) decision. It held that the appellant rightly availed Cenvat Credit for maintenance services, not Works Contract or Construction Services. The Tribunal emphasized that maintenance services are inclusive in the definition of input services under Cenvat Credit Rules. The Department failed to prove that the services were solely for construction, shifting the burden of proof to them. The decision highlighted the importance of proper interpretation of law and evidence in determining Cenvat Credit eligibility for maintenance services. en-us Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jul 2018 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363029 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) decision. It held that the appellant rightly availed Cenvat Credit for maintenance services, not Works Contract or Construction Services. The Tribunal emphasized that maintenance services are inclusive in the definition of input services under Cenvat Credit Rules. The Department failed to prove that the services were solely for construction, shifting the burden of proof to them. The decision highlighted the importance of proper interpretation of law and evidence in determining Cenvat Credit eligibility for maintenance services. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363029