<?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 (4) TMI 366 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768452</link>
    <description>CESTAT Bangalore upheld denial of CENVAT credit on Clean Energy Cess paid on coal during September 2014 to June 2017. The tribunal confirmed that CEC is not among specified duties eligible for credit under Rule 3(1) of CCR, 2004. Distinguished the Shree Renuka Sugars case, following Deccan Cements precedent that sugar cess and CEC operate differently. Demand for CENVAT credit recovery confirmed but penalty set aside as matter involved legal interpretation. Appeal disposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Apr 2025 08:28:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=812573" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 366 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768452</link>
      <description>CESTAT Bangalore upheld denial of CENVAT credit on Clean Energy Cess paid on coal during September 2014 to June 2017. The tribunal confirmed that CEC is not among specified duties eligible for credit under Rule 3(1) of CCR, 2004. Distinguished the Shree Renuka Sugars case, following Deccan Cements precedent that sugar cess and CEC operate differently. Demand for CENVAT credit recovery confirmed but penalty set aside as matter involved legal interpretation. Appeal disposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>