<?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 1423 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348666</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal regarding the denial of Cenvat Credit based on ISD invoices not received at the Kolkata office. The Tribunal held that credit cannot be denied solely on the grounds of services not being used in relation to the unit&#039;s manufacturing activities, citing Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and relevant precedents. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing that the appellant availed credit in compliance with the prescribed conditions for ISD distribution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2017 09:11:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=490747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1423 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348666</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal regarding the denial of Cenvat Credit based on ISD invoices not received at the Kolkata office. The Tribunal held that credit cannot be denied solely on the grounds of services not being used in relation to the unit&#039;s manufacturing activities, citing Rule 7 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, and relevant precedents. The impugned order was set aside, emphasizing that the appellant availed credit in compliance with the prescribed conditions for ISD distribution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348666</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>