<?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>2015 (12) TMI 1774 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275699</link>
    <description>The Tax Appeal challenging the CESTAT order on Cenvat credit for outward goods transportation agency service was dismissed. The court held that outward transport service used by manufacturers for transporting finished goods up to the purchaser&#039;s premises falls within the definition of &quot;input service&quot; under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The court emphasized that the intention of the Legislature was not to exclude outward transportation service and that it qualifies as an input service. The decision relied on a previous case&#039;s judgment and highlighted that the definition of &quot;input service&quot; should not be limited by the term &quot;includes.&quot;</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2018 18:20:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1774 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275699</link>
      <description>The Tax Appeal challenging the CESTAT order on Cenvat credit for outward goods transportation agency service was dismissed. The court held that outward transport service used by manufacturers for transporting finished goods up to the purchaser&#039;s premises falls within the definition of &quot;input service&quot; under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The court emphasized that the intention of the Legislature was not to exclude outward transportation service and that it qualifies as an input service. The decision relied on a previous case&#039;s judgment and highlighted that the definition of &quot;input service&quot; should not be limited by the term &quot;includes.&quot;</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275699</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>