<?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 1375 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336730</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on structural steel used in fabrication, repair, and support of plant and machinery was treated as admissible where the goods satisfied the user test under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The later exclusion of structural steel was applied prospectively and was not treated as clarificatory, so it could not be used to deny credit for the relevant period. The contrary Larger Bench view in Vandana Global was regarded as displaced by later High Court rulings and the Supreme Court ratio in Rajasthan Spinning &amp; Weaving Mills. Credit for steel used in chimney fabrication, furnace repairs, and supporting structures was therefore held allowable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2016 07:26:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453171" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1375 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336730</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on structural steel used in fabrication, repair, and support of plant and machinery was treated as admissible where the goods satisfied the user test under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The later exclusion of structural steel was applied prospectively and was not treated as clarificatory, so it could not be used to deny credit for the relevant period. The contrary Larger Bench view in Vandana Global was regarded as displaced by later High Court rulings and the Supreme Court ratio in Rajasthan Spinning &amp; Weaving Mills. Credit for steel used in chimney fabrication, furnace repairs, and supporting structures was therefore held allowable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336730</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>