<?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>2008 (9) TMI 288 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33834</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the availability of refund of Cenvat credit on AED paid on inputs used in the manufacture of the exported final product under rebate claim. The decision was based on the specific provisions of Rule 18 and Rule 5 of the relevant Acts, as interpreted in previous judgments, which established the eligibility of the respondents to claim such a refund through Cenvat credit. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72462" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 288 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33834</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the availability of refund of Cenvat credit on AED paid on inputs used in the manufacture of the exported final product under rebate claim. The decision was based on the specific provisions of Rule 18 and Rule 5 of the relevant Acts, as interpreted in previous judgments, which established the eligibility of the respondents to claim such a refund through Cenvat credit. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33834</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>