<?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 (2) TMI 515 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765969</link>
    <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding CENVAT credit on banking charges/commission for bank guarantees related to VAT refunds on raw materials used in manufacturing exported products. The tribunal held that banking services for obtaining guarantees to claim VAT refunds on raw materials qualify as input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, as they relate to procurement of inputs used in manufacturing final products. The VAT setoff arising from exports does not nullify the connection between raw materials and final products. Extended period of limitation and penalty were deemed unsustainable for issues involving legal interpretation. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:26:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=797715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 515 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765969</link>
      <description>CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding CENVAT credit on banking charges/commission for bank guarantees related to VAT refunds on raw materials used in manufacturing exported products. The tribunal held that banking services for obtaining guarantees to claim VAT refunds on raw materials qualify as input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, as they relate to procurement of inputs used in manufacturing final products. The VAT setoff arising from exports does not nullify the connection between raw materials and final products. Extended period of limitation and penalty were deemed unsustainable for issues involving legal interpretation. The impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>