<?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>2009 (1) TMI 193 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33961</link>
    <description>Service tax credit on mobile phones used for official purposes was admissible under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 because the phones had a sufficient nexus with manufacture and business operations. The earlier restriction in the Service Tax Credit Rules, 2002, which denied credit for telephones not installed in factory premises, was not carried forward into the 2004 regime. A later Board clarification dated 23.8.2007 also recognised credit on mobile telephones used in relation to manufacture or output service from 10.9.2004 onwards. Credit could not therefore be denied merely because the phones were not installed in the factory premises.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2014 15:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 193 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33961</link>
      <description>Service tax credit on mobile phones used for official purposes was admissible under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 because the phones had a sufficient nexus with manufacture and business operations. The earlier restriction in the Service Tax Credit Rules, 2002, which denied credit for telephones not installed in factory premises, was not carried forward into the 2004 regime. A later Board clarification dated 23.8.2007 also recognised credit on mobile telephones used in relation to manufacture or output service from 10.9.2004 onwards. Credit could not therefore be denied merely because the phones were not installed in the factory premises.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33961</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>