<?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 (9) TMI 1527 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294746</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the challenged order. The decision was based on the satisfactory fulfillment of the User Test Principle for cenvat credit eligibility, validity of certificates from Chartered Accountant and Chartered Engineer, and the absence of justification for invoking the extended period of limitation. The appellant&#039;s availed cenvat credit on goods used in construction was deemed valid, as they met the requirements for credit eligibility under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2021 19:57:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=643167" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 1527 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294746</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the challenged order. The decision was based on the satisfactory fulfillment of the User Test Principle for cenvat credit eligibility, validity of certificates from Chartered Accountant and Chartered Engineer, and the absence of justification for invoking the extended period of limitation. The appellant&#039;s availed cenvat credit on goods used in construction was deemed valid, as they met the requirements for credit eligibility under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>