https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758075 CESTAT New Delhi upheld demand for wrongly availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 91,01,452/- on mobilization advance paid in 2010-11 but debited in 2012. The appellant claimed credit on service tax paid by contractors on mobilization advances for construction services. CESTAT held construction services were excluded from input service definition under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, making such credit inadmissible. However, interest under Rule 14 was set aside as appellant maintained sufficient credit balance. Extended limitation period and penalties under sections 77 and 78 were also set aside due to regular compliance and cooperation during audit, with no evidence of intent to evade tax. Appeal allowed partially. en-us Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Sep 2024 16:00:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758075 CESTAT New Delhi upheld demand for wrongly availed CENVAT credit of Rs. 91,01,452/- on mobilization advance paid in 2010-11 but debited in 2012. The appellant claimed credit on service tax paid by contractors on mobilization advances for construction services. CESTAT held construction services were excluded from input service definition under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, making such credit inadmissible. However, interest under Rule 14 was set aside as appellant maintained sufficient credit balance. Extended limitation period and penalties under sections 77 and 78 were also set aside due to regular compliance and cooperation during audit, with no evidence of intent to evade tax. Appeal allowed partially. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758075