<?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>2009 (3) TMI 272 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75030</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal found that the appellants had reversed the Cenvat credit in January 2005 before commencing clearances, making them eligible for refunds as no Cenvat credit was available at the time of clearances. The Tribunal held that the appellants were not obligated to avail credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules when claiming depreciation under the Income-tax Act. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 272 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75030</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, allowed the appeal in favor of the appellants. The Tribunal found that the appellants had reversed the Cenvat credit in January 2005 before commencing clearances, making them eligible for refunds as no Cenvat credit was available at the time of clearances. The Tribunal held that the appellants were not obligated to avail credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules when claiming depreciation under the Income-tax Act. Consequently, the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75030</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>