<?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>2010 (5) TMI 212 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77262</link>
    <description>The appellate authority upheld the denial of Cenvat credit for duty paid on PP woven bags used for packing imported raw sugar, stating that the packing materials used outside the factory of production did not meet the criteria for credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The denial was based on the interpretation of Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, emphasizing the necessity of using inputs in the factory of production to claim credit. The comparison of previous judgments supported the decision, highlighting that packing materials used for raw material outside the factory did not qualify as inputs for final products. The imposition of a penalty was deemed unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 212 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77262</link>
      <description>The appellate authority upheld the denial of Cenvat credit for duty paid on PP woven bags used for packing imported raw sugar, stating that the packing materials used outside the factory of production did not meet the criteria for credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules. The denial was based on the interpretation of Rule 2(k) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, emphasizing the necessity of using inputs in the factory of production to claim credit. The comparison of previous judgments supported the decision, highlighting that packing materials used for raw material outside the factory did not qualify as inputs for final products. The imposition of a penalty was deemed unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>