<?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 (2) TMI 1016 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355595</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee regarding the disallowance of cenvat credit for outdoor catering services for the canteen post 1.4.2011, except for the amount recovered from employees. The demand for recovery of cenvat credit on canteen services was set aside, along with the penalty imposed. The matter of disallowance of credit in respect of a group insurance policy was remanded for further examination to determine if the insurance cover was exclusively for injuries to factory employees. The penalty imposed on the disallowed cenvat credit for outdoor catering service was set aside, and the interest demand was not specifically addressed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 07:10:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=509226" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1016 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355595</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee regarding the disallowance of cenvat credit for outdoor catering services for the canteen post 1.4.2011, except for the amount recovered from employees. The demand for recovery of cenvat credit on canteen services was set aside, along with the penalty imposed. The matter of disallowance of credit in respect of a group insurance policy was remanded for further examination to determine if the insurance cover was exclusively for injuries to factory employees. The penalty imposed on the disallowed cenvat credit for outdoor catering service was set aside, and the interest demand was not specifically addressed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355595</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>