<?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 (12) TMI 271 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352002</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that the appellants were not entitled to credit on items used for manufacturing storage racks as they did not fall under the definition of capital goods. The decisions cited by the appellants were deemed inapplicable as they related to complete storage racks or crates, not parts of such storage systems. The penalty imposed on the appellants was set aside, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 07:58:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498732" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 271 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352002</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that the appellants were not entitled to credit on items used for manufacturing storage racks as they did not fall under the definition of capital goods. The decisions cited by the appellants were deemed inapplicable as they related to complete storage racks or crates, not parts of such storage systems. The penalty imposed on the appellants was set aside, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352002</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>