<?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 836 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345724</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, affirming the appellant&#039;s entitlement to cenvat credit on sugar cess. Despite the Department&#039;s pending appeal in the Supreme Court, the Tribunal found no fault in the impugned order, citing the binding nature of the Karnataka High Court judgment. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, granting them the liberty to act in accordance with the law following the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling on the pending Special Leave Petition (SLP).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2017 08:14:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482777" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 836 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345724</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision, affirming the appellant&#039;s entitlement to cenvat credit on sugar cess. Despite the Department&#039;s pending appeal in the Supreme Court, the Tribunal found no fault in the impugned order, citing the binding nature of the Karnataka High Court judgment. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, granting them the liberty to act in accordance with the law following the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling on the pending Special Leave Petition (SLP).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345724</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>