<?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 (9) TMI 42 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331781</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of Cenvat credit on returned goods due to lack of evidence provided by the appellant. The extended period for demand under the Central Excise Act was deemed rightly invoked as the appellant failed to disclose credit availed on invoices. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the order disallowing a portion of the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2016 16:53:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439777" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 42 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331781</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of Cenvat credit on returned goods due to lack of evidence provided by the appellant. The extended period for demand under the Central Excise Act was deemed rightly invoked as the appellant failed to disclose credit availed on invoices. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the order disallowing a portion of the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>