https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370505 The Tribunal held that the services provided qualified as export services, entitling the appellant to a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, credit for Building maintenance charges and Rent-a-Cab services was rightfully denied due to insufficient evidence and explicit exclusion in the rules. The case was remanded for the adjudicating authority to recalculate the refund amount, excluding the denied input services. en-us Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370505 The Tribunal held that the services provided qualified as export services, entitling the appellant to a cash refund of accumulated CENVAT Credit under Rule 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. However, credit for Building maintenance charges and Rent-a-Cab services was rightfully denied due to insufficient evidence and explicit exclusion in the rules. The case was remanded for the adjudicating authority to recalculate the refund amount, excluding the denied input services. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370505