<?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>2016 (3) TMI 992 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325808</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that the respondent is entitled to Cenvat credit on barbed wire as it qualifies as an accessory under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. All conditions for availing the credit were met, and the value of the barbed wire was included in the assessable value. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2016 14:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 992 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325808</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that the respondent is entitled to Cenvat credit on barbed wire as it qualifies as an accessory under Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. All conditions for availing the credit were met, and the value of the barbed wire was included in the assessable value. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>