This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Revenue cannot deny Cenvat Credit without proving that activity has no nexus with output services
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Kantar IMRB Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Mumbai Central (CESTAT Mumbai)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All CESTAT, CESTAT Mumbai
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Kantar IMRB Vs Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Mumbai Central (CESTAT Mumbai)
Appellant had paid rent on halls hired in the hotels where the halls were hired for interviews with the respondents and all the expenses were reimbursed by their clients on actual basis. He further stated that for conducting market research, employees have to travel and stay in hotels and such hotel stay expenses are essential part of activity for output services and therefore, service tax paid on hotel stay expenses were availed by them as CENVAT Credit. Further, he stated that both the said activities are...




