https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400365 Banks were entitled to CENVAT credit of service tax paid on premium to the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation because deposit insurance was treated as an integral and mandatory part of banking operations. The premium was linked to the statutory ability to accept deposits and provide banking services, and the service was brought within the main part of the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The reversal mechanism under Rule 6(3B) did not defeat credit where the service had nexus with taxable output services and was not excluded from the definition. Departmental appeals therefore failed. en-us Wed, 23 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Nov 2024 11:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400365 Banks were entitled to CENVAT credit of service tax paid on premium to the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation because deposit insurance was treated as an integral and mandatory part of banking operations. The premium was linked to the statutory ability to accept deposits and provide banking services, and the service was brought within the main part of the definition of input service under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The reversal mechanism under Rule 6(3B) did not defeat credit where the service had nexus with taxable output services and was not excluded from the definition. Departmental appeals therefore failed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 23 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400365