https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401582 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejected refund claim for the quarter January 2017 to March 2017 under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. The Tribunal held that the services in question were necessary for providing output services, entitling them to cenvat credit. It emphasized that admissibility of cenvat credit can be contested at any stage if not raised earlier, and disallowance of input credit without proper notice is unjust. The Tribunal granted relief to the appellant, overturning the impugned order. en-us Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Dec 2020 13:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401582 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejected refund claim for the quarter January 2017 to March 2017 under Rule 5 of CCR, 2004. The Tribunal held that the services in question were necessary for providing output services, entitling them to cenvat credit. It emphasized that admissibility of cenvat credit can be contested at any stage if not raised earlier, and disallowance of input credit without proper notice is unjust. The Tribunal granted relief to the appellant, overturning the impugned order. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 08 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401582