<?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>2018 (9) TMI 2171 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465829</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit was held admissible on service tax paid for advertisement, event management, catering and housekeeping services because the services were received by the appellant and their receipt was not disputed on the records. As the period in dispute was prior to 1 April 2011, the Tribunal followed earlier decisions treating similar input services as eligible for credit. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged, and the appellant was entitled to avail the credit on the services in question.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 11 Jan 2026 09:19:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=877501" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 2171 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465829</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit was held admissible on service tax paid for advertisement, event management, catering and housekeeping services because the services were received by the appellant and their receipt was not disputed on the records. As the period in dispute was prior to 1 April 2011, the Tribunal followed earlier decisions treating similar input services as eligible for credit. The impugned order was set aside to the extent challenged, and the appellant was entitled to avail the credit on the services in question.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465829</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>