<?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>2009 (6) TMI 359 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75458</link>
    <description>Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001 was held inapplicable where the manufacturer maintained separate records for inputs used in exempted and dutiable goods and did not avail credit on inputs attributable to exempted goods. The record showed segregation of inputs through invoices and separate inventory maintenance, establishing that credit was taken only on inputs used for dutiable wagons. On those facts, the demand under Rule 6 was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113723" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 359 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75458</link>
      <description>Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2001 was held inapplicable where the manufacturer maintained separate records for inputs used in exempted and dutiable goods and did not avail credit on inputs attributable to exempted goods. The record showed segregation of inputs through invoices and separate inventory maintenance, establishing that credit was taken only on inputs used for dutiable wagons. On those facts, the demand under Rule 6 was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75458</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>