<?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 (11) TMI 351 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370008</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original confirming the proposals against the appellant for alleged dual benefit under CENVAT Credit and depreciation on Excise Duty paid on capital goods. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for consideration of the revised income tax return and assessment order. The appeal was partially allowed for statistical purposes, highlighting the importance of avoiding double benefits and rectifying mistakes promptly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:55:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541038" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 351 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370008</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original confirming the proposals against the appellant for alleged dual benefit under CENVAT Credit and depreciation on Excise Duty paid on capital goods. The matter was remanded for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for consideration of the revised income tax return and assessment order. The appeal was partially allowed for statistical purposes, highlighting the importance of avoiding double benefits and rectifying mistakes promptly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>