https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772475 The dominant issue was whether CENVAT credit was admissible on input services used for setting up a factory after 01.04.2011, despite the amended definition of "input service" under the CCR, 2004 omitting express inclusion of "setting up." The Tribunal held that such services, though no longer specifically enumerated, remain covered under the main/means limb of the definition because they have a direct nexus with manufacture of final products, consistent with prior Tribunal precedent. Consequently, the appellant was held entitled to avail CENVAT credit on the disputed services post 01.04.2011, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 11:42:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772475 The dominant issue was whether CENVAT credit was admissible on input services used for setting up a factory after 01.04.2011, despite the amended definition of "input service" under the CCR, 2004 omitting express inclusion of "setting up." The Tribunal held that such services, though no longer specifically enumerated, remain covered under the main/means limb of the definition because they have a direct nexus with manufacture of final products, consistent with prior Tribunal precedent. Consequently, the appellant was held entitled to avail CENVAT credit on the disputed services post 01.04.2011, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 23 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772475