<?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 (6) TMI 650 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248746</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit on MS/HR plates and input services was denied without properly examining the appellant&#039;s claims that the items were used in setting up a cement factory and fabricating machinery parts and capital assets. The reasoning relied largely on assumptions drawn from project imports and did not address the specific factual submissions or the actual use of the steel items. Because of this non-consideration of relevant material and inadequate appreciation of the record, the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2014 10:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 650 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248746</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit on MS/HR plates and input services was denied without properly examining the appellant&#039;s claims that the items were used in setting up a cement factory and fabricating machinery parts and capital assets. The reasoning relied largely on assumptions drawn from project imports and did not address the specific factual submissions or the actual use of the steel items. Because of this non-consideration of relevant material and inadequate appreciation of the record, the order was set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>