<?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>2009 (6) TMI 46 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34326</link>
    <description>The appeal was partially allowed, with the denial of CENVAT credit on garden maintenance service upheld due to lack of nexus to manufacturing. However, the appellant was granted the benefit of CENVAT credit on outdoor catering service for supplying food to factory workers. The penalty imposed by the lower appellate authority was maintained as the appellant failed to justify their conduct regarding garden maintenance, leading to the imposition of a partial penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 17:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 46 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34326</link>
      <description>The appeal was partially allowed, with the denial of CENVAT credit on garden maintenance service upheld due to lack of nexus to manufacturing. However, the appellant was granted the benefit of CENVAT credit on outdoor catering service for supplying food to factory workers. The penalty imposed by the lower appellate authority was maintained as the appellant failed to justify their conduct regarding garden maintenance, leading to the imposition of a partial penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>