<?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 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338445</link>
    <description>The Member (Judicial) remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority as the appellant failed to provide evidence of the input received by the supplier and credit availed. The appellant was granted an opportunity to submit necessary documents to establish the connection between the input supplied and duty passed on. The impugned order was overturned, and the appeal was allowed for further verification based on the documents to be provided by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2017 10:13:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 145 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338445</link>
      <description>The Member (Judicial) remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority as the appellant failed to provide evidence of the input received by the supplier and credit availed. The appellant was granted an opportunity to submit necessary documents to establish the connection between the input supplied and duty passed on. The impugned order was overturned, and the appeal was allowed for further verification based on the documents to be provided by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338445</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>