<?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>2018 (7) TMI 2261 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302578</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order disallowing CENVAT Credit and imposing penalties on the appellant. Relying on consignment notes and transport documents, the Tribunal found that goods were received and utilized in the appellant&#039;s manufacturing process. Drawing on a previous decision in favor of another party, the Tribunal concluded that the department failed to prove fraudulent activity, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2022 20:38:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681235" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2261 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302578</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order disallowing CENVAT Credit and imposing penalties on the appellant. Relying on consignment notes and transport documents, the Tribunal found that goods were received and utilized in the appellant&#039;s manufacturing process. Drawing on a previous decision in favor of another party, the Tribunal concluded that the department failed to prove fraudulent activity, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302578</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>