<?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>2012 (9) TMI 820 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217012</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because it was taken after one year, as the excise law and Cenvat Credit Rules did not prescribe any limitation period for availment of credit. The view that credit must necessarily be claimed within one year was unsupported by the statutory framework and was therefore incorrect. The denial of credit on the ground of delay was set aside, and the assessee succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2014 10:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 820 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217012</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit could not be denied merely because it was taken after one year, as the excise law and Cenvat Credit Rules did not prescribe any limitation period for availment of credit. The view that credit must necessarily be claimed within one year was unsupported by the statutory framework and was therefore incorrect. The denial of credit on the ground of delay was set aside, and the assessee succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217012</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>