<?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 (12) TMI 1116 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372347</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit was held admissible on construction services used to set up hotel from which taxable output services were provided, because such services formed part of the common premises and fell within the input service framework as applied to specified services. Credit was also allowed on security services and internet services used for the same premises, since the Department did not prove exclusive use for exempted activity and the special credit provision enlarged entitlement for those specified services. On that basis, the demand based on denial of credit failed, while the limited relief already granted on interest and penalty was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2018 06:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=548005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1116 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372347</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit was held admissible on construction services used to set up hotel from which taxable output services were provided, because such services formed part of the common premises and fell within the input service framework as applied to specified services. Credit was also allowed on security services and internet services used for the same premises, since the Department did not prove exclusive use for exempted activity and the special credit provision enlarged entitlement for those specified services. On that basis, the demand based on denial of credit failed, while the limited relief already granted on interest and penalty was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372347</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>