<?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 1467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351588</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing cenvat credit on disputed services such as Bank Charges, Insurance Charges, Taxi Charges, Warehousing Service, and Commission Charges. They determined that these services were essential for providing taxable output services and qualified as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules, based on precedent cases. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and favored the appellant in the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 16:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=497855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (11) TMI 1467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351588</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing cenvat credit on disputed services such as Bank Charges, Insurance Charges, Taxi Charges, Warehousing Service, and Commission Charges. They determined that these services were essential for providing taxable output services and qualified as input services under the Cenvat Credit Rules, based on precedent cases. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and favored the appellant in the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>