<?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>2010 (6) TMI 757 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174142</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling that the assessee was not liable to pay 8% of the price of exempted goods due to the absence of separate accounts of inputs as required by Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The Court found no errors in the Tribunal&#039;s decision, supporting its reliance on legal precedents and relevant material, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 May 2017 07:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399421" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 757 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174142</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, ruling that the assessee was not liable to pay 8% of the price of exempted goods due to the absence of separate accounts of inputs as required by Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. The Court found no errors in the Tribunal&#039;s decision, supporting its reliance on legal precedents and relevant material, ultimately dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174142</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>