<?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>2026 (1) TMI 782 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785026</link>
    <description>Whether prior registration is a precondition for claiming Cenvat credit: held that prior registration is not required; Tribunal and HC precedent govern, so credits availed before registration are admissible. Outcome: credit claim upheld. Whether input services used in setting up/erection of immovable property (excluded by amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2011): held that the issue is settled by precedent and that the bulk of credit was availed before the amendment; post-amendment amounts were found not to pertain to excluded construction services. Outcome: challenged disallowances denied; impugned order upheld and Revenue&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2026 08:03:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=878934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 782 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785026</link>
      <description>Whether prior registration is a precondition for claiming Cenvat credit: held that prior registration is not required; Tribunal and HC precedent govern, so credits availed before registration are admissible. Outcome: credit claim upheld. Whether input services used in setting up/erection of immovable property (excluded by amendment w.e.f. 01.04.2011): held that the issue is settled by precedent and that the bulk of credit was availed before the amendment; post-amendment amounts were found not to pertain to excluded construction services. Outcome: challenged disallowances denied; impugned order upheld and Revenue&#039;s appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785026</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>