<?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>2022 (10) TMI 195 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428637</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit was held admissible on business-related input services where the invoices met Rule 9(1)(f) requirements and the services, including those connected with captive mines and employee training through a tour operator, fell within Rule 2(l). The Tribunal treated the captive mines as part of the same business arrangement and accepted that the training service was for skill enhancement, not personal use. It also held that the extended limitation period could not be invoked because the records were regularly maintained, reflected in returns, and the notice lacked a specific allegation and supporting material of suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2022 13:09:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 195 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428637</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit was held admissible on business-related input services where the invoices met Rule 9(1)(f) requirements and the services, including those connected with captive mines and employee training through a tour operator, fell within Rule 2(l). The Tribunal treated the captive mines as part of the same business arrangement and accepted that the training service was for skill enhancement, not personal use. It also held that the extended limitation period could not be invoked because the records were regularly maintained, reflected in returns, and the notice lacked a specific allegation and supporting material of suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428637</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>