<?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 (6) TMI 844 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772731</link>
    <description>Tribunal ruled on Cenvat Credit for outdoor catering services, finding appellant not entitled to credit post-01.04.2011 based on Supreme Court precedent. Despite disallowing credit, the Tribunal held that bona fide availment under previous interpretational uncertainty did not constitute fraud. The extended limitation period was wrongly invoked, and the show-cause notice was set aside, effectively allowing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2025 08:41:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828819" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 844 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772731</link>
      <description>Tribunal ruled on Cenvat Credit for outdoor catering services, finding appellant not entitled to credit post-01.04.2011 based on Supreme Court precedent. Despite disallowing credit, the Tribunal held that bona fide availment under previous interpretational uncertainty did not constitute fraud. The extended limitation period was wrongly invoked, and the show-cause notice was set aside, effectively allowing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772731</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>