https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429317 An Input Service Distributor could distribute credit of input services to a contract manufacturing unit under Rule 7 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for the period before 01.04.2016, where manufacture was carried on under Notification No. 36/2001-CE (NT). The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench view that the CENVAT scheme is meant to prevent cascading of taxes and duties, and that even under the unamended Rule 2(m) and Rule 7, service tax credit could be distributed by the principal manufacturer to its manufacturing units, including job workers and contract manufacturers. The later substitution of the rule was treated as clarificatory, and pro-rata distribution based on turnover was held permissible. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Oct 2022 10:02:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429317 An Input Service Distributor could distribute credit of input services to a contract manufacturing unit under Rule 7 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 for the period before 01.04.2016, where manufacture was carried on under Notification No. 36/2001-CE (NT). The Tribunal applied the Larger Bench view that the CENVAT scheme is meant to prevent cascading of taxes and duties, and that even under the unamended Rule 2(m) and Rule 7, service tax credit could be distributed by the principal manufacturer to its manufacturing units, including job workers and contract manufacturers. The later substitution of the rule was treated as clarificatory, and pro-rata distribution based on turnover was held permissible. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429317