<?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 (5) TMI 129 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379401</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because goods used in constructing and erecting a cement plant become part of an assembled immovable plant, where they are used as components or parts in the manufacturing stream and for manufacture of capital goods used in the factory. Credit on erection, commissioning and installation services used for setting up the plant before 01.04.2011 was also admissible because such services were used to install machinery and equipment necessary for commencement of manufacture, and no distinct ineligible service category was identified in the notice. The extended period of limitation was unavailable because the credit was disclosed in returns and records, audit had already occurred, and there was no suppression with intent to evade duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2019 16:42:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569344" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 129 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379401</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit cannot be denied merely because goods used in constructing and erecting a cement plant become part of an assembled immovable plant, where they are used as components or parts in the manufacturing stream and for manufacture of capital goods used in the factory. Credit on erection, commissioning and installation services used for setting up the plant before 01.04.2011 was also admissible because such services were used to install machinery and equipment necessary for commencement of manufacture, and no distinct ineligible service category was identified in the notice. The extended period of limitation was unavailable because the credit was disclosed in returns and records, audit had already occurred, and there was no suppression with intent to evade duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>