<?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 1372 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348615</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by S.H. Kelkar &amp;amp; Co. Ltd. regarding the denial of cenvat credit on services used for corporate restructuring through a merger. The services were not considered as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules, as they were found to be for corporate restructuring rather than falling under specific categories like accounting, financing, or legal services. The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax paid for these services related to the merger, amounting to Rs. 2,89,018.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2017 16:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=490607" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1372 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348615</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by S.H. Kelkar &amp;amp; Co. Ltd. regarding the denial of cenvat credit on services used for corporate restructuring through a merger. The services were not considered as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules, as they were found to be for corporate restructuring rather than falling under specific categories like accounting, financing, or legal services. The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax paid for these services related to the merger, amounting to Rs. 2,89,018.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>