<?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 1611 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356190</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for a fresh determination on the admissibility of CENVAT credit. It held that since the Commissioner (Appeals) did not rule on the CENVAT credit claim, the issue remained unresolved, and the department could decide on it. The Tribunal set aside the previous order and directed the Adjudicating Authority to assess the CENVAT credit based on the appellant&#039;s submissions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:10:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510619" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1611 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356190</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, remanding the case for a fresh determination on the admissibility of CENVAT credit. It held that since the Commissioner (Appeals) did not rule on the CENVAT credit claim, the issue remained unresolved, and the department could decide on it. The Tribunal set aside the previous order and directed the Adjudicating Authority to assess the CENVAT credit based on the appellant&#039;s submissions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>