<?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>2018 (1) TMI 533 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353797</link>
    <description>Refund of unutilized Cenvat credit lying with a 100% EOU was upheld after the first appellate authority relied on Karnataka High Court rulings that registration of the exporting unit was not necessary to claim such refund. The Revenue&#039;s contrary authority was distinguished because it concerned availment of credit for manufacture and clearance of goods for home consumption. No basis was shown to stay the refund order, and the stay petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2018 08:26:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 533 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353797</link>
      <description>Refund of unutilized Cenvat credit lying with a 100% EOU was upheld after the first appellate authority relied on Karnataka High Court rulings that registration of the exporting unit was not necessary to claim such refund. The Revenue&#039;s contrary authority was distinguished because it concerned availment of credit for manufacture and clearance of goods for home consumption. No basis was shown to stay the refund order, and the stay petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353797</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>