<?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 989 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348232</link>
    <description>M.S. channels, M.S. angles, joists, beams and welding electrodes used to fabricate support structures for capital goods were held eligible for Cenvat credit because, on the user test, such items functioned as components or accessories of the machinery under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute was treated as one of interpretation of the credit entitlement, and the penalty was therefore held unsustainable and cancelled. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2017 19:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=489820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 989 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348232</link>
      <description>M.S. channels, M.S. angles, joists, beams and welding electrodes used to fabricate support structures for capital goods were held eligible for Cenvat credit because, on the user test, such items functioned as components or accessories of the machinery under Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The dispute was treated as one of interpretation of the credit entitlement, and the penalty was therefore held unsustainable and cancelled. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>