<?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 (12) TMI 808 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269504</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the Central Excise Appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow the appeal and waive the interest liability on the irregularly taken Cenvat credit. The Court emphasized the circumstances surrounding the credit taking, including seeking clarification from the department, and found no wrongdoing in the appellant&#039;s actions, leading to the conclusion that the credit was not inadmissible. The Court also rejected the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s decision to grant consequential relief despite the admission of credit ineligibility by the respondent, stating there was no legal basis for interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=409164" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 808 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269504</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the Central Excise Appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s decision to allow the appeal and waive the interest liability on the irregularly taken Cenvat credit. The Court emphasized the circumstances surrounding the credit taking, including seeking clarification from the department, and found no wrongdoing in the appellant&#039;s actions, leading to the conclusion that the credit was not inadmissible. The Court also rejected the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s decision to grant consequential relief despite the admission of credit ineligibility by the respondent, stating there was no legal basis for interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>