<?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 (7) TMI 156 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329558</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case for further adjudication to verify the books of accounts and ledger entries regarding the invoices for which Cenvat credit was claimed. The judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining proper records and conducting thorough verification before disallowing credit solely based on the non-availability of physical invoices.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2016 13:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 156 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329558</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case for further adjudication to verify the books of accounts and ledger entries regarding the invoices for which Cenvat credit was claimed. The judgment emphasized the importance of maintaining proper records and conducting thorough verification before disallowing credit solely based on the non-availability of physical invoices.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329558</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>