<?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 (11) TMI 432 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350553</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit was held admissible on MS angles, plates, channels and joists used to fabricate components and structural supports for kilns, conveyors, bunkers and pollution control equipment. The evidence, including a Chartered Engineer certificate and the Revenue&#039;s own acceptance of substantial credit on that basis, was sufficient to establish actual use in relation to capital goods. A denial based only on a general objection that the items were not inputs or capital goods, or on an alleged lack of proof of use, was not justified on the facts. Credit on such structural steel items cannot be refused where acceptable evidence shows use in fabrication of components or supports for plant and equipment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2017 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=495143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 432 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350553</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit was held admissible on MS angles, plates, channels and joists used to fabricate components and structural supports for kilns, conveyors, bunkers and pollution control equipment. The evidence, including a Chartered Engineer certificate and the Revenue&#039;s own acceptance of substantial credit on that basis, was sufficient to establish actual use in relation to capital goods. A denial based only on a general objection that the items were not inputs or capital goods, or on an alleged lack of proof of use, was not justified on the facts. Credit on such structural steel items cannot be refused where acceptable evidence shows use in fabrication of components or supports for plant and equipment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>