<?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>2025 (1) TMI 1041 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764977</link>
    <description>The SC dismissed the appeals, upholding the CESTAT finding that the transactions were not liable to service tax and that receipts towards ocean freight qualified as eligible documents under Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The court declined to sustain imposition of consolidated penalties under Sections 76-78 and did not permit denial of Cenvat credit based solely on procedural irregularities. The challenge to the extended period of limitation failed and there was no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 17:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=791188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1041 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764977</link>
      <description>The SC dismissed the appeals, upholding the CESTAT finding that the transactions were not liable to service tax and that receipts towards ocean freight qualified as eligible documents under Rule 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The court declined to sustain imposition of consolidated penalties under Sections 76-78 and did not permit denial of Cenvat credit based solely on procedural irregularities. The challenge to the extended period of limitation failed and there was no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764977</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>