<?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 (11) TMI 1128 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335110</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that services used in a guest house/farm house away from the factory were not eligible for CENVAT Credit based on a judgment by the Hon&#039;ble Gujarat High Court. The penalty imposed under Rule 15(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 was reduced from the availed credit amount to Rs. 50,000, considering the circumstances of the case. The appeal was partially allowed, modifying the order to reflect the reduced penalty, providing relief to the Appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2016 10:30:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449310" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1128 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335110</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that services used in a guest house/farm house away from the factory were not eligible for CENVAT Credit based on a judgment by the Hon&#039;ble Gujarat High Court. The penalty imposed under Rule 15(1) of CENVAT Credit Rules 2004 was reduced from the availed credit amount to Rs. 50,000, considering the circumstances of the case. The appeal was partially allowed, modifying the order to reflect the reduced penalty, providing relief to the Appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>