<?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 (4) TMI 647 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126163</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the case for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a speaking order with proper reasoning. The case involved recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT credit, admissibility of credit on various charges, denial of credit on specific items, lack of reasoning in the Commissioner (Appeals) order, and ultimately resulted in a remand for a fresh decision by the lower appellate authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2012 17:41:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 647 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126163</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the case for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a speaking order with proper reasoning. The case involved recovery of wrongly availed CENVAT credit, admissibility of credit on various charges, denial of credit on specific items, lack of reasoning in the Commissioner (Appeals) order, and ultimately resulted in a remand for a fresh decision by the lower appellate authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126163</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>