<?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 (12) TMI 638 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208375</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on GTA service for freight on ex-factory transportation is available where sales are on FOR destination basis and freight forms part of the price. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that ownership did not pass until delivery, the seller bore the transit risk, and the freight was included in the assessable value; those findings were not effectively challenged. Relying on the Board&#039;s circular and the cited High Court ruling, the position was that the statutory conditions for credit were prima facie met. The stay applications were therefore correctly rejected, and the respondent was prima facie entitled to the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 13:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (12) TMI 638 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208375</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on GTA service for freight on ex-factory transportation is available where sales are on FOR destination basis and freight forms part of the price. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that ownership did not pass until delivery, the seller bore the transit risk, and the freight was included in the assessable value; those findings were not effectively challenged. Relying on the Board&#039;s circular and the cited High Court ruling, the position was that the statutory conditions for credit were prima facie met. The stay applications were therefore correctly rejected, and the respondent was prima facie entitled to the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208375</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>