<?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 (5) TMI 1114 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360550</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order in three appeals concerning duty demand on dismantled plants and machinery cleared as scrap. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, emphasizing that duty payment on capital goods removed as scrap is linked to credit availed, which was not the case here. By referencing legal provisions and precedents, including the Hindustan Zinc Ltd. case, the Tribunal concluded that duty imposition without credit utilization was unjustified, ultimately allowing all three appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2018 15:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=520890" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 1114 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360550</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned order in three appeals concerning duty demand on dismantled plants and machinery cleared as scrap. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, emphasizing that duty payment on capital goods removed as scrap is linked to credit availed, which was not the case here. By referencing legal provisions and precedents, including the Hindustan Zinc Ltd. case, the Tribunal concluded that duty imposition without credit utilization was unjustified, ultimately allowing all three appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>