<?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 (7) TMI 86 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344974</link>
    <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that Cenvat credit on steel items and other disputed goods could not be denied where credible evidence showed actual use in fabrication or manufacture of capital goods and their components within the factory. A Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate supported that use, and the lower authority failed to consider it properly. Applying the user test recognised by the Supreme Court for similar M.S. items, the Tribunal treated eligibility as dependent on actual functional use rather than the mere character of the goods as structural items. Credit was therefore admissible, the denial was unsustainable, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2017 07:21:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=478992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 86 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344974</link>
      <description>CESTAT New Delhi held that Cenvat credit on steel items and other disputed goods could not be denied where credible evidence showed actual use in fabrication or manufacture of capital goods and their components within the factory. A Chartered Engineer&#039;s certificate supported that use, and the lower authority failed to consider it properly. Applying the user test recognised by the Supreme Court for similar M.S. items, the Tribunal treated eligibility as dependent on actual functional use rather than the mere character of the goods as structural items. Credit was therefore admissible, the denial was unsustainable, and the appeal succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344974</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>