<?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>2024 (6) TMI 908 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754301</link>
    <description>The Telangana HC dismissed an appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial under CCR 2004. The respondent had filed invoices and returns with jurisdictional offices and paid service tax. The Tribunal found no allegation in the show-cause notice that services fell outside Rule 2(l) scope. The appellant could not raise new factual contentions in the final order without specific allegations in the show-cause notice. The respondent had completed necessary formalities and compliances. The Tribunal&#039;s factual finding regarding witness credibility during cross-examination was plausible and did not raise substantial questions of law warranting interference.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=757079" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 908 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754301</link>
      <description>The Telangana HC dismissed an appeal regarding CENVAT credit denial under CCR 2004. The respondent had filed invoices and returns with jurisdictional offices and paid service tax. The Tribunal found no allegation in the show-cause notice that services fell outside Rule 2(l) scope. The appellant could not raise new factual contentions in the final order without specific allegations in the show-cause notice. The respondent had completed necessary formalities and compliances. The Tribunal&#039;s factual finding regarding witness credibility during cross-examination was plausible and did not raise substantial questions of law warranting interference.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754301</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>