<?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>2017 (1) TMI 77 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336997</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on steel items used in manufacturing could not be denied for a period before 07.07.2009 by applying the amended definition of input, because that amendment was held inapplicable to the relevant period. The Tribunal followed prior decisions treating similar goods as eligible inputs for the period in dispute and found the later amendment could not govern past credit claims. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable, and the assessee&#039;s appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2017 08:57:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 77 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336997</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on steel items used in manufacturing could not be denied for a period before 07.07.2009 by applying the amended definition of input, because that amendment was held inapplicable to the relevant period. The Tribunal followed prior decisions treating similar goods as eligible inputs for the period in dispute and found the later amendment could not govern past credit claims. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable, and the assessee&#039;s appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>