<?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 (3) TMI 238 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356535</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a pharmaceutical exporter, in a dispute over the denial of CENVAT credit for professional fees related to export incentives. The Tribunal held that the services provided by M/s JAK Traders Pvt Ltd for compliance with export requirements were eligible as input services under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It emphasized the nexus required between services and manufacturing activities up to the clearance of final products, stating that post-manufacturing activities were also eligible for credit. The denial of credit was deemed unjustified, and the appellant was granted relief with the disallowance order being set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Mar 2019 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=511662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 238 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356535</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a pharmaceutical exporter, in a dispute over the denial of CENVAT credit for professional fees related to export incentives. The Tribunal held that the services provided by M/s JAK Traders Pvt Ltd for compliance with export requirements were eligible as input services under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. It emphasized the nexus required between services and manufacturing activities up to the clearance of final products, stating that post-manufacturing activities were also eligible for credit. The denial of credit was deemed unjustified, and the appellant was granted relief with the disallowance order being set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>