<?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>2018 (12) TMI 2034 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466588</link>
    <description>Utilisation of Cenvat credit during the default period under Rule 8(3A) was left open because the validity and operation of that rule were pending before the Supreme Court. As the Supreme Court had stayed the High Court judgment, the appeals were not decided on merits. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision after the Supreme Court&#039;s outcome.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2026 19:07:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 2034 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466588</link>
      <description>Utilisation of Cenvat credit during the default period under Rule 8(3A) was left open because the validity and operation of that rule were pending before the Supreme Court. As the Supreme Court had stayed the High Court judgment, the appeals were not decided on merits. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision after the Supreme Court&#039;s outcome.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466588</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>