<?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 (7) TMI 333 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206418</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit of service tax taken belatedly cannot be denied merely because it was not availed at the earliest opportunity, where no express statutory time limit exists. The Tribunal followed earlier decisions holding that, absent a prescribed limitation, delay by itself does not defeat the credit entitlement. It rejected the Revenue&#039;s argument that a reasonable period should be read in by implication, noting that the cited Supreme Court observations caution against importing a limitation where the statute does not provide one. The Board&#039;s circular also stated that credit should be taken early, but delay alone is not a ground to refuse the benefit. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 333 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206418</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit of service tax taken belatedly cannot be denied merely because it was not availed at the earliest opportunity, where no express statutory time limit exists. The Tribunal followed earlier decisions holding that, absent a prescribed limitation, delay by itself does not defeat the credit entitlement. It rejected the Revenue&#039;s argument that a reasonable period should be read in by implication, noting that the cited Supreme Court observations caution against importing a limitation where the statute does not provide one. The Board&#039;s circular also stated that credit should be taken early, but delay alone is not a ground to refuse the benefit. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>