<?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>2018 (7) TMI 2353 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458864</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chandigarh ruled in favor of the appellant, granting Cenvat credit. The denial was initially due to registration issues, but the tribunal determined that the registration application date should be regarded as the effective registration date. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Nov 2024 18:59:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=778413" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2353 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458864</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chandigarh ruled in favor of the appellant, granting Cenvat credit. The denial was initially due to registration issues, but the tribunal determined that the registration application date should be regarded as the effective registration date. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>