<?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 1281 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185706</link>
    <description>The appellate authority ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the availment of Cenvat credit on services like rent-a-cab, mobile phone services, telephone services, pest control, and group insurance. The decision was based on precedents from the Tribunal, Karnataka High Court, Bombay High Court, and Gujarat High Court, supporting the appellant&#039;s eligibility for Cenvat Credit on these services. The impugned order denying the credit was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2016 12:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439077" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1281 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185706</link>
      <description>The appellate authority ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the availment of Cenvat credit on services like rent-a-cab, mobile phone services, telephone services, pest control, and group insurance. The decision was based on precedents from the Tribunal, Karnataka High Court, Bombay High Court, and Gujarat High Court, supporting the appellant&#039;s eligibility for Cenvat Credit on these services. The impugned order denying the credit was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185706</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>