<?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 1283 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185943</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit of service tax paid on outward transportation could not be denied merely because the goods were transferred to a sister unit rather than sold. The service tax was paid by the recipient under the reverse charge mechanism, and the scheme entitled the recipient to credit of tax suffered on the taxable service. Denial of credit on the ground that the sister unit should have taken it had no legal basis, so the credit claim was upheld as genuine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439926" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1283 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185943</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit of service tax paid on outward transportation could not be denied merely because the goods were transferred to a sister unit rather than sold. The service tax was paid by the recipient under the reverse charge mechanism, and the scheme entitled the recipient to credit of tax suffered on the taxable service. Denial of credit on the ground that the sister unit should have taken it had no legal basis, so the credit claim was upheld as genuine.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>