<?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>2010 (2) TMI 285 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77102</link>
    <description>Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules applies to supplementary invoices issued by a manufacturer or importer for additional excise duty or customs duty, and it does not extend to additional service tax on input services. Credit to the recipient could not therefore be denied merely because the service provider was alleged to have suppressed facts. The demand was held unsustainable and disallowance of credit was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 285 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77102</link>
      <description>Rule 9(1)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules applies to supplementary invoices issued by a manufacturer or importer for additional excise duty or customs duty, and it does not extend to additional service tax on input services. Credit to the recipient could not therefore be denied merely because the service provider was alleged to have suppressed facts. The demand was held unsustainable and disallowance of credit was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77102</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>