<?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 (5) TMI 982 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176773</link>
    <description>The judgment overturned the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of the appellant manufacturer of Pet Polyester Chips. It clarified that Cenvat credit on service tax paid for outward transportation of goods cleared for export, specifically Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services, was admissible post-amendment. The interpretation of the place of removal extended up to the port for export transactions, making transportation to the port fall under the definition of &quot;clearances of goods up to the place of removal.&quot; Consequently, the appellant&#039;s appeals were allowed, setting aside the demand for Cenvat credit and associated penalties and interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 May 2016 11:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 982 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176773</link>
      <description>The judgment overturned the Commissioner (Appeals) decision, ruling in favor of the appellant manufacturer of Pet Polyester Chips. It clarified that Cenvat credit on service tax paid for outward transportation of goods cleared for export, specifically Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services, was admissible post-amendment. The interpretation of the place of removal extended up to the port for export transactions, making transportation to the port fall under the definition of &quot;clearances of goods up to the place of removal.&quot; Consequently, the appellant&#039;s appeals were allowed, setting aside the demand for Cenvat credit and associated penalties and interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176773</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>