<?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>2016 (6) TMI 1182 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191217</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on dumpers, structural items and other input materials was held fit for reconsideration where an earlier order of the same adjudicating authority had allowed credit on similar disputed items. As the impugned order did not follow that prior decision, the proceedings were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication in light of the earlier order and any other order relied upon by the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Mar 2017 10:06:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=462743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 1182 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191217</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on dumpers, structural items and other input materials was held fit for reconsideration where an earlier order of the same adjudicating authority had allowed credit on similar disputed items. As the impugned order did not follow that prior decision, the proceedings were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication in light of the earlier order and any other order relied upon by the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191217</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>