Case Law Details
Vodafone Mobile Services Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Chennai)
Held that the ceiling of 20% under Rule 6(3)(c) is not applicable to capital goods and 17 input services specified under Rule 6(5) of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004.
Facts- The appellant is in the business of providing ‘telephone services’ (later known as ‘telecommunication services’) which were brought under the Service Tax net with effect from 01.07.1994 vide Notification No. 01/94 dated 28.06.1994.
It appears that the appellant has been paying Service Tax regularly, but it appeared to the Revenue that the appellant was not paying
Service Tax on the ‘interconnection service’ falling under the category of telecommunication service, which enables the telephone subscribers of various telegraph authorities to connect with each other.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
