<?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 529 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247602</link>
    <description>The High Court remitted the case involving a sole proprietor concern&#039;s entitlement to Cenvat credit on inputs back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision. Emphasizing the need to scrutinize evidence of the appellant&#039;s business activities at the premises, the Court directed a reevaluation based on the documents presented. The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, highlighting the importance of examining invoices and evidence to determine the legitimacy of the Cenvat credit claim. The Court did not address merits beyond the issues discussed, maintaining the appellant&#039;s previous deposit for the Tribunal&#039;s final order, without requiring an additional deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 May 2014 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=355804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 529 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247602</link>
      <description>The High Court remitted the case involving a sole proprietor concern&#039;s entitlement to Cenvat credit on inputs back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision. Emphasizing the need to scrutinize evidence of the appellant&#039;s business activities at the premises, the Court directed a reevaluation based on the documents presented. The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, highlighting the importance of examining invoices and evidence to determine the legitimacy of the Cenvat credit claim. The Court did not address merits beyond the issues discussed, maintaining the appellant&#039;s previous deposit for the Tribunal&#039;s final order, without requiring an additional deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247602</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>