<?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 454 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379726</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on outward freight, transportation and outward delivery services was treated as admissible for the period governed by the unamended input service rule, because transportation up to the place of removal fell within the eligible scope. The later change substituting &quot;from the place of removal&quot; with &quot;upto the place of removal&quot; by Notification No. 10/2008-C.E. (N.T.) was applied prospectively. The appeal was also restored to its original number after dismissal for non-prosecution, on the explanation that previous counsel was absent due to illness. The order under challenge was set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2019 07:15:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=570039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 454 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379726</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on outward freight, transportation and outward delivery services was treated as admissible for the period governed by the unamended input service rule, because transportation up to the place of removal fell within the eligible scope. The later change substituting &quot;from the place of removal&quot; with &quot;upto the place of removal&quot; by Notification No. 10/2008-C.E. (N.T.) was applied prospectively. The appeal was also restored to its original number after dismissal for non-prosecution, on the explanation that previous counsel was absent due to illness. The order under challenge was set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>