<?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 (10) TMI 1179 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760580</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal against recovery of CENVAT credit under Rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The department had denied credit claiming missing or incorrect registration numbers in tax documents. The tribunal held that documentary inadequacies were merely technical errors. Since there was no allegation that services were not rendered or tax was not paid, the recovery order was set aside and credit was restored to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:15:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 1179 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760580</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal against recovery of CENVAT credit under Rule 9 of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The department had denied credit claiming missing or incorrect registration numbers in tax documents. The tribunal held that documentary inadequacies were merely technical errors. Since there was no allegation that services were not rendered or tax was not paid, the recovery order was set aside and credit was restored to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>