<?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 (7) TMI 590 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261629</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the Cenvat Credit of Rs. 34,535. Despite invoices being addressed to a temporary office, the appellants were entitled to credit as they had registered their premises with service tax. The dispute arose during the business setup period, and the Tribunal found no evidence of misuse. The impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:11:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390551" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (7) TMI 590 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261629</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, allowing the Cenvat Credit of Rs. 34,535. Despite invoices being addressed to a temporary office, the appellants were entitled to credit as they had registered their premises with service tax. The dispute arose during the business setup period, and the Tribunal found no evidence of misuse. The impugned order was set aside with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261629</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>