<?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 (3) TMI 1085 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209067</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on inputs used by a job worker in manufacture of goods cleared to the principal manufacturer was held admissible. Applying its Larger Bench precedent, the Tribunal treated such goods as not being exempted goods, so the restrictions on common inputs and the obligation to maintain separate accounts under Rule 6(2) did not apply. The denial of credit by the lower authority was therefore unsustainable and was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2013 14:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1085 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209067</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on inputs used by a job worker in manufacture of goods cleared to the principal manufacturer was held admissible. Applying its Larger Bench precedent, the Tribunal treated such goods as not being exempted goods, so the restrictions on common inputs and the obligation to maintain separate accounts under Rule 6(2) did not apply. The denial of credit by the lower authority was therefore unsustainable and was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>