<?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 680 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345568</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants could claim credit for input services related to captively consumed electricity but not for electricity sold outside the factory. The penalty was set aside due to a subsequent amendment clarifying the treatment of exempted goods. The appeal was partly allowed, with a remand to the adjudicating authority for further evaluation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2023 14:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482141" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 680 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345568</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants could claim credit for input services related to captively consumed electricity but not for electricity sold outside the factory. The penalty was set aside due to a subsequent amendment clarifying the treatment of exempted goods. The appeal was partly allowed, with a remand to the adjudicating authority for further evaluation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345568</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>