<?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 (1) TMI 1362 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458696</link>
    <description>The demand under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was based on alleged common input service credit used for both dutiable and exempted goods without separate accounts. The Tribunal noted that the only disputed CENVAT credit relating to insurance services had already been reversed in full, which neutralised the Revenue&#039;s basis for the demand. The demand therefore did not survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 1362 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458696</link>
      <description>The demand under Rule 6(3) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was based on alleged common input service credit used for both dutiable and exempted goods without separate accounts. The Tribunal noted that the only disputed CENVAT credit relating to insurance services had already been reversed in full, which neutralised the Revenue&#039;s basis for the demand. The demand therefore did not survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>