<?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 414 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337334</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing Cenvat credit on imported goods under Customs Notification No. 92/2004-CUS. It found that the respondent, who imported goods under the SFIS scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 and paid duties through Duty Credit Scrip, was eligible for Cenvat credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal determined that once the goods were received as manufacturing inputs, the respondent could avail of the credit without contravening any provisions of the Rules. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed for lacking substantial arguments against the impugned order&#039;s findings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2017 19:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 414 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337334</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing Cenvat credit on imported goods under Customs Notification No. 92/2004-CUS. It found that the respondent, who imported goods under the SFIS scheme of the Foreign Trade Policy 2004-2009 and paid duties through Duty Credit Scrip, was eligible for Cenvat credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The Tribunal determined that once the goods were received as manufacturing inputs, the respondent could avail of the credit without contravening any provisions of the Rules. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed for lacking substantial arguments against the impugned order&#039;s findings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>