<?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 433 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338733</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit could not be denied on inputs used for windmill gear boxes where the goods were not manufactured exclusively as exempted goods and were cleared partly under exemption and partly on payment of duty. The basis for disallowance on exclusive use in exempted goods therefore failed, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was rejected. The Tribunal also noted that the same issue had already been decided in the assessee&#039;s own case on identical facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:50:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458173" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 433 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338733</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit could not be denied on inputs used for windmill gear boxes where the goods were not manufactured exclusively as exempted goods and were cleared partly under exemption and partly on payment of duty. The basis for disallowance on exclusive use in exempted goods therefore failed, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge was rejected. The Tribunal also noted that the same issue had already been decided in the assessee&#039;s own case on identical facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>