https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338739 The tribunal held that the appellant was not entitled to avail CENVAT credit on structural items used for erecting towers under Chapter Heading 73 as capital goods. Penalties were set aside, demands beyond the limitation period were rejected, and specific appeals saw restoration of original orders for demands within the normal limitation period. In one appeal, the case was remanded for further proceedings due to missing invoices. The tribunal's decisions were based on legal precedents and interpretations related to the eligibility of credit on such structural items. en-us Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Feb 2017 08:57:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338739 The tribunal held that the appellant was not entitled to avail CENVAT credit on structural items used for erecting towers under Chapter Heading 73 as capital goods. Penalties were set aside, demands beyond the limitation period were rejected, and specific appeals saw restoration of original orders for demands within the normal limitation period. In one appeal, the case was remanded for further proceedings due to missing invoices. The tribunal's decisions were based on legal precedents and interpretations related to the eligibility of credit on such structural items. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338739