<?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>2023 (2) TMI 1343 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458170</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty. The appellant had reversed credit attributable to exempted trading activities under Rule 6(3A) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal followed precedents from E-Connect Systems and National Steel Agro Industries Ltd., holding that total CENVAT credit in the formula includes only common input service credit, not credit exclusively used for dutiable goods manufacture. The adjudicating authority erred in calculating trading service value and total credit. Since the appellant had already reversed the required amount per prescribed formula, the demand was set aside along with interest and penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Oct 2024 08:36:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 1343 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458170</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding recovery of CENVAT credit with interest and penalty. The appellant had reversed credit attributable to exempted trading activities under Rule 6(3A) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The tribunal followed precedents from E-Connect Systems and National Steel Agro Industries Ltd., holding that total CENVAT credit in the formula includes only common input service credit, not credit exclusively used for dutiable goods manufacture. The adjudicating authority erred in calculating trading service value and total credit. Since the appellant had already reversed the required amount per prescribed formula, the demand was set aside along with interest and penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458170</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>