<?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>2006 (5) TMI 364 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119658</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit reversal on exemption of the final product was held not to justify interim interference with the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order. The Tribunal found that the Revenue had not established a strong prima facie case for stay, and therefore declined to disturb the finding that the credit need not be reversed or treated as lapsed merely because the final product became exempt. The Revenue&#039;s application for interim stay was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:57:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 364 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119658</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit reversal on exemption of the final product was held not to justify interim interference with the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order. The Tribunal found that the Revenue had not established a strong prima facie case for stay, and therefore declined to disturb the finding that the credit need not be reversed or treated as lapsed merely because the final product became exempt. The Revenue&#039;s application for interim stay was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>