<?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 (10) TMI 1637 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266362</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the Cenvat credit on Diesel Generating Sets and Air Compressor that was initially disallowed due to the sale of electricity generated. The Tribunal held that since there was no evidence to show that the electricity generated was used exclusively for exempted goods, the denial of credit was unjustified. The decision was based on the interpretation of Rule 6(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, emphasizing that credit can only be denied if the capital goods are used exclusively for manufacturing exempted goods, which was not the case here.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 20:36:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1637 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266362</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the Cenvat credit on Diesel Generating Sets and Air Compressor that was initially disallowed due to the sale of electricity generated. The Tribunal held that since there was no evidence to show that the electricity generated was used exclusively for exempted goods, the denial of credit was unjustified. The decision was based on the interpretation of Rule 6(4) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, emphasizing that credit can only be denied if the capital goods are used exclusively for manufacturing exempted goods, which was not the case here.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>