<?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 (4) TMI 1665 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790596</link>
    <description>Non-maintenance of separate accounts for taxable and exempted supplies attracted reversal consequences under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, and reverse charge on rent-a-cab remained payable for the normal period. CENVAT credit was nevertheless held admissible on rent-a-cab used for business, caretaker or security services for guest houses, employee health insurance, debit notes supported by proper particulars, and works contract services used for repair and renovation rather than new construction. Refund or remission of licence fees was not treated as consideration for a declared service of tolerating an act or situation. Interest was upheld on advances because tax became payable on receipt, but the extended period was rejected absent deliberate suppression or intent to evade.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 10:53:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898807" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1665 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790596</link>
      <description>Non-maintenance of separate accounts for taxable and exempted supplies attracted reversal consequences under Rule 6(3) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, and reverse charge on rent-a-cab remained payable for the normal period. CENVAT credit was nevertheless held admissible on rent-a-cab used for business, caretaker or security services for guest houses, employee health insurance, debit notes supported by proper particulars, and works contract services used for repair and renovation rather than new construction. Refund or remission of licence fees was not treated as consideration for a declared service of tolerating an act or situation. Interest was upheld on advances because tax became payable on receipt, but the extended period was rejected absent deliberate suppression or intent to evade.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790596</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>