<?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 (8) TMI 262 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346204</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit was admissible on M.S. angles, channels, beams, plates, pipes and welding electrodes used to fabricate capital goods and their support structures in the factory. Applying the user test, the tribunal treated these structural steel items as integrally connected with the functioning of the machines, rather than as mere civil structures. It also held that the amendment relied on by the Revenue operated prospectively. The disputed goods, being used in fabrication of capital goods and their support structures, were therefore within the scope of capital goods for credit purposes, and credit was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:21:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 262 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346204</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit was admissible on M.S. angles, channels, beams, plates, pipes and welding electrodes used to fabricate capital goods and their support structures in the factory. Applying the user test, the tribunal treated these structural steel items as integrally connected with the functioning of the machines, rather than as mere civil structures. It also held that the amendment relied on by the Revenue operated prospectively. The disputed goods, being used in fabrication of capital goods and their support structures, were therefore within the scope of capital goods for credit purposes, and credit was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346204</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>