<?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 (5) TMI 1125 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328144</link>
    <description>Under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as applicable up to 01.04.2008, service tax paid on GTA services used for outward transportation of final products qualified as input service credit. The cited precedent had already settled that such outward freight credit was admissible for the pre-01.04.2008 period, so the denial of credit for that period was unsustainable. The later period was not disputed because the credit had already been reversed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 May 2016 18:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=429768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1125 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328144</link>
      <description>Under Rule 2(l) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 as applicable up to 01.04.2008, service tax paid on GTA services used for outward transportation of final products qualified as input service credit. The cited precedent had already settled that such outward freight credit was admissible for the pre-01.04.2008 period, so the denial of credit for that period was unsustainable. The later period was not disputed because the credit had already been reversed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>