<?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 839 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772726</link>
    <description>The SC/CESTAT addressed Cenvat credit eligibility for bright bars, affirming credit availability when suppliers have paid central excise duty. The Tribunal rejected revenue&#039;s arguments against credit claim, citing consistent judicial precedents. The court held that absence of manufacturing does not invalidate credit when duty is paid on inputs. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order and granting relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 15:18:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 839 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772726</link>
      <description>The SC/CESTAT addressed Cenvat credit eligibility for bright bars, affirming credit availability when suppliers have paid central excise duty. The Tribunal rejected revenue&#039;s arguments against credit claim, citing consistent judicial precedents. The court held that absence of manufacturing does not invalidate credit when duty is paid on inputs. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order and granting relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772726</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>