<?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 (3) TMI 1624 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198738</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the respondent&#039;s refund claim under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, emphasizing the significance of proper documentation and procedural adherence. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed due to a discrepancy regarding the existence of a show cause notice, with the benefit of the doubt favoring the respondent. The Tribunal found no fault in the impugned orders, affirming the entitlement to the refund claim for the disputed services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2018 07:44:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1624 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198738</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the respondent&#039;s refund claim under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, emphasizing the significance of proper documentation and procedural adherence. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed due to a discrepancy regarding the existence of a show cause notice, with the benefit of the doubt favoring the respondent. The Tribunal found no fault in the impugned orders, affirming the entitlement to the refund claim for the disputed services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>