<?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>2012 (6) TMI 855 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186491</link>
    <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals for rectification of a mistake in the final order due to a clerical error made by the Personal Secretary. The order inaccurately reflected the facts of the case regarding appeals filed by Revenue against the Respondents for availing Cenvat credit of service tax on specific services. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection of the appeals based on previous Tribunal decisions supporting the Respondents&#039; position, despite Revenue&#039;s argument that the nature and place of service use were not fully considered. The appeals were dismissed as the issues had already been addressed and decided against Revenue in prior decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2016 15:56:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441791" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 855 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186491</link>
      <description>The Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeals for rectification of a mistake in the final order due to a clerical error made by the Personal Secretary. The order inaccurately reflected the facts of the case regarding appeals filed by Revenue against the Respondents for availing Cenvat credit of service tax on specific services. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection of the appeals based on previous Tribunal decisions supporting the Respondents&#039; position, despite Revenue&#039;s argument that the nature and place of service use were not fully considered. The appeals were dismissed as the issues had already been addressed and decided against Revenue in prior decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186491</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>