<?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 (8) TMI 495 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365023</link>
    <description>Where the service tax paid by the assessee was available as corresponding Cenvat credit, the dispute was treated as revenue neutral. In such a revenue-neutral situation, the basis for invoking the extended period of limitation does not survive, and the extended period could not be applied. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2018 07:28:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530101" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 495 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365023</link>
      <description>Where the service tax paid by the assessee was available as corresponding Cenvat credit, the dispute was treated as revenue neutral. In such a revenue-neutral situation, the basis for invoking the extended period of limitation does not survive, and the extended period could not be applied. The issue was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>