<?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 504 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352235</link>
    <description>Welding electrodes used in manufacture and maintenance were treated as eligible Cenvat inputs, following the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view that such use is sufficiently connected with the manufacturing process. Structural steel items used to fabricate support structures for machinery such as a kiln, conveyor system and furnace were also held eligible because, under the user test, they formed part of the relevant capital goods. The amendment to the definition of input was treated as prospective and could not be relied on to deny credit for the disputed period. Credit was therefore admissible on both categories and the disallowance was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2017 07:43:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 504 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352235</link>
      <description>Welding electrodes used in manufacture and maintenance were treated as eligible Cenvat inputs, following the Tribunal&#039;s earlier view that such use is sufficiently connected with the manufacturing process. Structural steel items used to fabricate support structures for machinery such as a kiln, conveyor system and furnace were also held eligible because, under the user test, they formed part of the relevant capital goods. The amendment to the definition of input was treated as prospective and could not be relied on to deny credit for the disputed period. Credit was therefore admissible on both categories and the disallowance was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>