<?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 952 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365480</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, confirming the Appellant&#039;s entitlement to claim Cenvat Credit based on supplementary invoices issued by the coal company. The decision was grounded on the debatable nature of the duty payment issue pending before the Supreme Court, aligning with past rulings in analogous cases. The Tribunal emphasized that as long as the Excise duty liability matter is under Supreme Court adjudication, there is no suppression of facts warranting denial of credit for supplementary invoices.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=531082" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 952 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365480</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, confirming the Appellant&#039;s entitlement to claim Cenvat Credit based on supplementary invoices issued by the coal company. The decision was grounded on the debatable nature of the duty payment issue pending before the Supreme Court, aligning with past rulings in analogous cases. The Tribunal emphasized that as long as the Excise duty liability matter is under Supreme Court adjudication, there is no suppression of facts warranting denial of credit for supplementary invoices.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>