<?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>2019 (7) TMI 1405 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383709</link>
    <description>After the 01.04.2011 amendment to Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, repair, maintenance, fabrication, dismantling, erection and commissioning services remain eligible input services when they are integrally connected with renovation, repair, maintenance or modernisation of a factory or machinery. Credit is disallowed only to the extent the services are shown to be used for construction of a building, civil structure, or foundation/support structure for capital goods. On the stated facts, the record supported the assessee&#039;s claim that the services were substantially for existing factory and machinery works, and the demand could survive only for the limited civil-work portion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jul 2019 06:21:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=581632" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1405 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383709</link>
      <description>After the 01.04.2011 amendment to Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, repair, maintenance, fabrication, dismantling, erection and commissioning services remain eligible input services when they are integrally connected with renovation, repair, maintenance or modernisation of a factory or machinery. Credit is disallowed only to the extent the services are shown to be used for construction of a building, civil structure, or foundation/support structure for capital goods. On the stated facts, the record supported the assessee&#039;s claim that the services were substantially for existing factory and machinery works, and the demand could survive only for the limited civil-work portion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383709</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>