<?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 (9) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347654</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeals and granting consequential benefits. It held that the place of removal for export goods is the port of export, not the factory gate. The judgment emphasized the significance of export documentation and previous rulings in determining the eligibility of CENVAT credit on transport expenses for goods exported out of India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488598" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 411 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347654</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the appeals and granting consequential benefits. It held that the place of removal for export goods is the port of export, not the factory gate. The judgment emphasized the significance of export documentation and previous rulings in determining the eligibility of CENVAT credit on transport expenses for goods exported out of India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>