<?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>2014 (5) TMI 453 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247526</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit remained available on duty-paid inputs temporarily taken out of the factory and later brought back for use in manufacture, because their re-entry and actual use were undisputed. The absence of prior permission and non-entry in records did not by itself defeat credit where the movement was for a temporary purpose such as shortage of space. On that basis, denial of credit was unsustainable, and the related demand and penalty could not be maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 453 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247526</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit remained available on duty-paid inputs temporarily taken out of the factory and later brought back for use in manufacture, because their re-entry and actual use were undisputed. The absence of prior permission and non-entry in records did not by itself defeat credit where the movement was for a temporary purpose such as shortage of space. On that basis, denial of credit was unsustainable, and the related demand and penalty could not be maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>