<?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 1446 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351567</link>
    <description>The Tribunal condoned a 10-day delay in filing the appeal and proceeded with the hearing. The appellant, involved in manufacturing HDPE pipes, faced a demand for 10% of the value of exempted final products due to not maintaining separate records for common input services. The appellant reversed full credit with interest on common inputs, satisfying Rule 6 compliance. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal set aside the demand, concluding that full credit reversal with interest negated the need for the 10% payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:37:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497834" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 1446 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351567</link>
      <description>The Tribunal condoned a 10-day delay in filing the appeal and proceeded with the hearing. The appellant, involved in manufacturing HDPE pipes, faced a demand for 10% of the value of exempted final products due to not maintaining separate records for common input services. The appellant reversed full credit with interest on common inputs, satisfying Rule 6 compliance. Relying on precedents, the Tribunal set aside the demand, concluding that full credit reversal with interest negated the need for the 10% payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351567</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>