<?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 (5) TMI 941 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343203</link>
    <description>The appellant was found eligible for CENVAT credit of welding electrodes consumed between August 2005 to February 2009 for fabrication of support structures forming part of capital goods. The Division Bench held that the lower authorities&#039; finding lacked concrete evidence and referenced a judgment supporting the appellant&#039;s position. The impugned order was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief, in line with the decision in Sree Rayalaseema Hi-Strength Hypo Ltd. case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 May 2017 09:06:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=469247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 941 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343203</link>
      <description>The appellant was found eligible for CENVAT credit of welding electrodes consumed between August 2005 to February 2009 for fabrication of support structures forming part of capital goods. The Division Bench held that the lower authorities&#039; finding lacked concrete evidence and referenced a judgment supporting the appellant&#039;s position. The impugned order was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief, in line with the decision in Sree Rayalaseema Hi-Strength Hypo Ltd. case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343203</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>