<?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 642 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219627</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the denial of cenvat credit on trading activity due to the failure to maintain separate records, confirming the demand with interest and penalty. The penalty on the production officer was set aside, while the penalty on the first appellant was upheld. The decision emphasized the necessity of accurate record-keeping and verifying service providers to prevent penalties and demands for denied credits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Aug 2014 13:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 642 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219627</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the denial of cenvat credit on trading activity due to the failure to maintain separate records, confirming the demand with interest and penalty. The penalty on the production officer was set aside, while the penalty on the first appellant was upheld. The decision emphasized the necessity of accurate record-keeping and verifying service providers to prevent penalties and demands for denied credits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219627</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>