<?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 (12) TMI 102 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219087</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit on outdoor catering service is not available automatically and depends on statutory and factual conditions, including whether the service was linked to the employer&#039;s obligation to maintain canteen facilities and whether the assessee satisfied the conditions recognised by higher courts. Relevant verification included the number of workers employed, any recovery from employees toward food or canteen coupons, and whether proportionate credit attributable to employee-borne cost had already been reversed. Because these facts required examination, the issue was not decided on merits and was remanded to the original authority for de novo verification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Oct 2012 18:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 102 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219087</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit on outdoor catering service is not available automatically and depends on statutory and factual conditions, including whether the service was linked to the employer&#039;s obligation to maintain canteen facilities and whether the assessee satisfied the conditions recognised by higher courts. Relevant verification included the number of workers employed, any recovery from employees toward food or canteen coupons, and whether proportionate credit attributable to employee-borne cost had already been reversed. Because these facts required examination, the issue was not decided on merits and was remanded to the original authority for de novo verification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>