<?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>Appellant&#039;s 6% Payment u/r 6(3) Reviewed; Rule 6(3D) Overlooked in Exemption Eligibility, Case Remanded.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61314</link>
    <description>Area based exemption - appellant paid an amount equal to 6% under rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - It is found that the adjudicating authority has not touched upon rule 6(3D) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 while deciding the eligibility of the exemption notification no. 30/2004-CE - matter remanded back - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2022 10:57:47 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2022 10:57:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666449" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appellant&#039;s 6% Payment u/r 6(3) Reviewed; Rule 6(3D) Overlooked in Exemption Eligibility, Case Remanded.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61314</link>
      <description>Area based exemption - appellant paid an amount equal to 6% under rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 - It is found that the adjudicating authority has not touched upon rule 6(3D) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 while deciding the eligibility of the exemption notification no. 30/2004-CE - matter remanded back - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2022 10:57:47 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>