<?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>2019 (2) TMI 1361 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375734</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules did not require reversal of credit for common inputs used for both taxable and non-service activities during the relevant period. The introduction of explanation (3) in 2016 did not apply retrospectively. The impugned decision was set aside, allowing the appeal and providing relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 05:25:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=559745" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1361 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375734</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules did not require reversal of credit for common inputs used for both taxable and non-service activities during the relevant period. The introduction of explanation (3) in 2016 did not apply retrospectively. The impugned decision was set aside, allowing the appeal and providing relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>