<?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 (7) TMI 434 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249397</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that M/s Mukund Ltd. incorrectly availed Cenvat credit for oxygen gas used by all entities in an integrated steel plant. The appeal focused solely on M/s Mukund Ltd., excluding the other two units. The Tribunal concluded that the credit availed was not admissible, but rejected the invocation of the extended period for excess credit. The demand for the extended period and penalties were not sustained, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification of the payable amount for the normal period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2014 19:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=359635" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 434 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249397</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that M/s Mukund Ltd. incorrectly availed Cenvat credit for oxygen gas used by all entities in an integrated steel plant. The appeal focused solely on M/s Mukund Ltd., excluding the other two units. The Tribunal concluded that the credit availed was not admissible, but rejected the invocation of the extended period for excess credit. The demand for the extended period and penalties were not sustained, and the matter was remanded for re-quantification of the payable amount for the normal period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>