<?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 (8) TMI 411 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364939</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit was examined on several factory-related services, with canteen-related services treated as eligible because the employer had a statutory canteen obligation under the Factories Act and the services were connected with manufacture. Professional fees for selecting a manager and services for shifting burnt blade ash outside the factory were also treated as admissible input services because they were linked to factory operations and manufacturing activity. By contrast, renovation of a separate union room in the recreation area was held not to be used in or in relation to manufacture and therefore did not qualify for credit. The penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2018 08:03:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=529929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 411 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364939</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit was examined on several factory-related services, with canteen-related services treated as eligible because the employer had a statutory canteen obligation under the Factories Act and the services were connected with manufacture. Professional fees for selecting a manager and services for shifting burnt blade ash outside the factory were also treated as admissible input services because they were linked to factory operations and manufacturing activity. By contrast, renovation of a separate union room in the recreation area was held not to be used in or in relation to manufacture and therefore did not qualify for credit. The penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364939</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>