<?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 (11) TMI 49 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267240</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for Cenvat credit on GTA services related to transportation of new vehicles. However, the demand for Cenvat credit on construction materials was maintained, and the penalty imposed by the lower authority was upheld due to the appellant&#039;s failure to pay the demanded amount for the construction materials.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=403886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 49 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267240</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for Cenvat credit on GTA services related to transportation of new vehicles. However, the demand for Cenvat credit on construction materials was maintained, and the penalty imposed by the lower authority was upheld due to the appellant&#039;s failure to pay the demanded amount for the construction materials.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>