<?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 (6) TMI 194 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361367</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed both appeals by setting aside the impugned orders. It concluded that the input services in question were eligible for CENVAT credit and that the documents provided were valid. The tribunal did not provide specific findings on the allegations of suppression and mis-declaration or the limitation issue, as the appeals were allowed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2018 14:36:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 194 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361367</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed both appeals by setting aside the impugned orders. It concluded that the input services in question were eligible for CENVAT credit and that the documents provided were valid. The tribunal did not provide specific findings on the allegations of suppression and mis-declaration or the limitation issue, as the appeals were allowed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361367</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>