<?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>2025 (12) TMI 1610 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784070</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit eligibility under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was examined for multiple input services. Credit on construction services used for repair/maintenance within office premises was allowed because such services fall within the inclusive limb of Rule 2(l) and the department could not selectively dispute a position accepted for earlier periods; the denial was set aside. Credit on health club/fitness services was allowed as the services were company-billed, linked to employee wellness required for 24x7 output service operations, and not personal consumption; the denial was set aside. Credit on restaurant/air-conditioned restaurant services was allowed on nexus where applicable, and any demand for 2015-16 was held time-barred absent grounds for extended limitation; recovery failed. Certain excluded/non-nexus services (including rent-a-cab and specified others) aggregating to a small amount were held ineligible; appeal partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2025 08:56:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=874480" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (12) TMI 1610 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784070</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit eligibility under Rule 2(l) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 was examined for multiple input services. Credit on construction services used for repair/maintenance within office premises was allowed because such services fall within the inclusive limb of Rule 2(l) and the department could not selectively dispute a position accepted for earlier periods; the denial was set aside. Credit on health club/fitness services was allowed as the services were company-billed, linked to employee wellness required for 24x7 output service operations, and not personal consumption; the denial was set aside. Credit on restaurant/air-conditioned restaurant services was allowed on nexus where applicable, and any demand for 2015-16 was held time-barred absent grounds for extended limitation; recovery failed. Certain excluded/non-nexus services (including rent-a-cab and specified others) aggregating to a small amount were held ineligible; appeal partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784070</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>