<?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>Service Tax Demand on Royalties Set Aside; CENVAT Credit Allowed; Input Service Credit Reversed Under Rule 6 CCR 2004</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91327</link>
    <description>The CESTAT set aside the demand for service tax on royalty charges under reverse charge, aligning with precedent that rights assigned predate payment terms. Denial of CENVAT credit on capital goods used partly for exempt services was reversed, recognizing credit eligibility where goods serve both taxable and exempt activities. However, the order was remanded regarding input service credit reversal, as the original authority failed to correctly apply proportionate reversal under Rule 6 of CCR, 2004. Service tax demands on works contract services were upheld, as the appellant failed to remit tax collected under specified work orders. Invocation of the extended limitation period was upheld due to non-cooperation and suppression of records duri.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:04:11 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:04:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=841511" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Service Tax Demand on Royalties Set Aside; CENVAT Credit Allowed; Input Service Credit Reversed Under Rule 6 CCR 2004</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91327</link>
      <description>The CESTAT set aside the demand for service tax on royalty charges under reverse charge, aligning with precedent that rights assigned predate payment terms. Denial of CENVAT credit on capital goods used partly for exempt services was reversed, recognizing credit eligibility where goods serve both taxable and exempt activities. However, the order was remanded regarding input service credit reversal, as the original authority failed to correctly apply proportionate reversal under Rule 6 of CCR, 2004. Service tax demands on works contract services were upheld, as the appellant failed to remit tax collected under specified work orders. Invocation of the extended limitation period was upheld due to non-cooperation and suppression of records duri.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2025 07:04:11 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91327</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>