<?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>2011 (2) TMI 39 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202474</link>
    <description>Eligibility for Cenvat credit on disputed items required fresh examination because the lower authorities had not recorded detailed findings on the assessee&#039;s stated use of the goods in the factory premises. The applicable test under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, together with relevant precedents, had to be applied after granting due opportunity and observing natural justice. The dispute was therefore remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo consideration, with all issues left open.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 39 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202474</link>
      <description>Eligibility for Cenvat credit on disputed items required fresh examination because the lower authorities had not recorded detailed findings on the assessee&#039;s stated use of the goods in the factory premises. The applicable test under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, together with relevant precedents, had to be applied after granting due opportunity and observing natural justice. The dispute was therefore remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for de novo consideration, with all issues left open.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>