<?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 143 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337063</link>
    <description>The Member (Judicial) allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and held that in cases of export, the port of export should be considered as the place of removal. It was determined that CHA services provided up to the port of export are admissible as input services, allowing for the Cenvat credit for such services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2017 10:51:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453908" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 143 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337063</link>
      <description>The Member (Judicial) allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and held that in cases of export, the port of export should be considered as the place of removal. It was determined that CHA services provided up to the port of export are admissible as input services, allowing for the Cenvat credit for such services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>