<?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 (3) TMI 245 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339742</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the Miscellaneous Application was disposed of in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the tax itself was not leviable during the disputed period, so the denial of CENVAT credit for service tax liability on services received from outside India was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2017 16:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460430" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 245 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339742</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the Miscellaneous Application was disposed of in favor of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the tax itself was not leviable during the disputed period, so the denial of CENVAT credit for service tax liability on services received from outside India was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339742</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>