<?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 (12) TMI 1121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336476</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and granting Cenvat benefit for the disputed steel items and related materials used for repair and maintenance. The decision was supported by legal interpretations, precedents, and the prospective application of the amended definition of &#039;input.&#039; The judgment highlighted the importance of considering the specific circumstances and legal principles in determining Cenvat credit eligibility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 18 Dec 2016 23:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452550" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336476</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeal and granting Cenvat benefit for the disputed steel items and related materials used for repair and maintenance. The decision was supported by legal interpretations, precedents, and the prospective application of the amended definition of &#039;input.&#039; The judgment highlighted the importance of considering the specific circumstances and legal principles in determining Cenvat credit eligibility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>