https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757499 CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed Revenue's appeal against 100% EOU's refund claim of Rs.48,38,722 accumulated CENVAT credit. Revenue challenged refund rejection arguing non-compliance with Notification No. 5/2006-CE(NT) conditions. CESTAT held input services definition under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 is inclusive and non-exhaustive, covering services used directly or indirectly in manufacturing and clearance. Credit eligibility cannot be questioned in refund proceedings per HCL Comnet precedent. Invoices addressed to corporate office instead of manufacturing premises constituted technical lapse only, not grounds for denying substantive benefits. Impugned order upholding refund was confirmed. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2024 18:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757499 CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed Revenue's appeal against 100% EOU's refund claim of Rs.48,38,722 accumulated CENVAT credit. Revenue challenged refund rejection arguing non-compliance with Notification No. 5/2006-CE(NT) conditions. CESTAT held input services definition under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 is inclusive and non-exhaustive, covering services used directly or indirectly in manufacturing and clearance. Credit eligibility cannot be questioned in refund proceedings per HCL Comnet precedent. Invoices addressed to corporate office instead of manufacturing premises constituted technical lapse only, not grounds for denying substantive benefits. Impugned order upholding refund was confirmed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757499