<?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>2013 (11) TMI 1391 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240214</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on M.S. angles, channels, beams, bars, plates and HR/CR coils used for supporting structures, working platforms and hand rails was held inadmissible because those items were not integral parts of plant and machinery but materials for foundations and allied structures. The retrospective effect of Notification No. 16/2009-CE(NT) was applied in line with the established credit principles, and the contrary precedent cited by the assessee was treated as inapplicable on the facts. Penalty was set aside because the dispute turned purely on interpretation of the credit rules and no separate basis for penal liability was shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2014 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1391 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240214</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on M.S. angles, channels, beams, bars, plates and HR/CR coils used for supporting structures, working platforms and hand rails was held inadmissible because those items were not integral parts of plant and machinery but materials for foundations and allied structures. The retrospective effect of Notification No. 16/2009-CE(NT) was applied in line with the established credit principles, and the contrary precedent cited by the assessee was treated as inapplicable on the facts. Penalty was set aside because the dispute turned purely on interpretation of the credit rules and no separate basis for penal liability was shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240214</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>