<?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 (8) TMI 35 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330651</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the disallowance of CENVAT credit on outdoor catering services was not justified. The services were deemed essential for compliance with the Factories Act, 1948, and integral to the manufacturing process, rather than primarily for personal use or consumption of employees. Citing legal definitions and precedents, the Tribunal set aside the original decision, allowing the appeal with consequential reliefs, if any.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=437046" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 35 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330651</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the disallowance of CENVAT credit on outdoor catering services was not justified. The services were deemed essential for compliance with the Factories Act, 1948, and integral to the manufacturing process, rather than primarily for personal use or consumption of employees. Citing legal definitions and precedents, the Tribunal set aside the original decision, allowing the appeal with consequential reliefs, if any.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=330651</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>