https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367412 The appellant's claim for CENVAT credit on legal services not directly related to cement manufacturing was denied as the services did not meet the criteria specified in Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The judge emphasized the necessity of services being linked to the manufacture of final products for credit eligibility. Additionally, the extended period of limitation was upheld due to the incorrect credit claim, leading to penalties imposed on the appellant. Despite arguments and citing case laws, the appellant's appeal was rejected, affirming the lower authorities' decisions. en-us Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 08:21:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367412 The appellant's claim for CENVAT credit on legal services not directly related to cement manufacturing was denied as the services did not meet the criteria specified in Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The judge emphasized the necessity of services being linked to the manufacture of final products for credit eligibility. Additionally, the extended period of limitation was upheld due to the incorrect credit claim, leading to penalties imposed on the appellant. Despite arguments and citing case laws, the appellant's appeal was rejected, affirming the lower authorities' decisions. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 18 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367412