The Customs, Excises, and Service Taxes Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) held that the CENVAT Credit cannot be denied on sales commission as it falls under the definition of “input service.” The Appellants, Federal Mogul TPR (India) Ltd. are engaged in the manufacture of Pistons and rings falling under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The sales and marketing of the product are undertaken by FMGIL as per the Marketing Agency Agreement between the two units.
Source Taxscan
Latest Posts in "India"
- India’s E-Invoicing Rules: Scope, Formats, Penalties, and Compliance Under the GST Framework
- Continuous Supply of Services Under GST: Legal Criteria Versus Commercial Practice Explained
- Tripura HC: ITC Cannot Be Denied to Bona Fide Purchaser for Supplier’s Tax Default
- Ready-to-Drink Non-Alcoholic Beverages Like Mojito to Attract 40% GST, Rules WB AAR
- Bombay HC: Assignment of Long-Term Industrial Leasehold Rights Not Taxable as ‘Supply’ Under GST
