https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418158 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing them to classify the service as Maintenance or Repair Service instead of Works Contract Service (WCS). The appellants were permitted to discharge service tax on the gross amount charged under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, including the value of goods, and avail Cenvat Credit on inputs for Works Contract Service (WCS) related to retreading activity. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs in accordance with the law. en-us Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:54:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418158 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing them to classify the service as Maintenance or Repair Service instead of Works Contract Service (WCS). The appellants were permitted to discharge service tax on the gross amount charged under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, including the value of goods, and avail Cenvat Credit on inputs for Works Contract Service (WCS) related to retreading activity. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs in accordance with the law. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=418158