<?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 (4) TMI 23 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341053</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It clarified that one-to-one correlation is not necessary for refund claims and emphasized not challenging the availment of Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal confirmed most of the refund claim, citing precedents supporting admissibility of certain credits and services, but denied a minor disputed amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 17:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=463697" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 23 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341053</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the refund claim under Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It clarified that one-to-one correlation is not necessary for refund claims and emphasized not challenging the availment of Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal confirmed most of the refund claim, citing precedents supporting admissibility of certain credits and services, but denied a minor disputed amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341053</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>