<?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 (3) TMI 360 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77263</link>
    <description>Under the CENVAT Credit Rules, the balance 50% of credit on capital goods could be taken in a subsequent financial year only when the goods were both in the manufacturer&#039;s possession and put to use in that year. The assessee could not isolate the reference to a subsequent year to bypass the use requirement, and precedents supported the view that premature availment was impermissible. Where credit was taken before installation or use, the Revenue was entitled to levy interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 16:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 360 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77263</link>
      <description>Under the CENVAT Credit Rules, the balance 50% of credit on capital goods could be taken in a subsequent financial year only when the goods were both in the manufacturer&#039;s possession and put to use in that year. The assessee could not isolate the reference to a subsequent year to bypass the use requirement, and precedents supported the view that premature availment was impermissible. Where credit was taken before installation or use, the Revenue was entitled to levy interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>