<?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>2015 (6) TMI 957 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261032</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant on all issues. The appellant successfully demonstrated entitlement to Cenvat Credit on documents from unregistered premises and office bills not in their name. As the Cenvat Credit was allowed, the penalty under Rule 15(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was not imposed. The tribunal carefully considered the evidence and legal provisions, ultimately deciding in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388814" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 957 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261032</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant on all issues. The appellant successfully demonstrated entitlement to Cenvat Credit on documents from unregistered premises and office bills not in their name. As the Cenvat Credit was allowed, the penalty under Rule 15(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules was not imposed. The tribunal carefully considered the evidence and legal provisions, ultimately deciding in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>