<?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 1942 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266668</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld. The court found that since duty had been paid on the clearances of laminated plastic film, the respondents were entitled to Cenvat credit. The decision was based on the principle that duty paid on clearances, even if the activity does not amount to manufacture, allows for the availing of Cenvat credit. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross objection was also disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2015 19:59:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=402826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 1942 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266668</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld. The court found that since duty had been paid on the clearances of laminated plastic film, the respondents were entitled to Cenvat credit. The decision was based on the principle that duty paid on clearances, even if the activity does not amount to manufacture, allows for the availing of Cenvat credit. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the cross objection was also disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>