<?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>1989 (12) TMI 205 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80472</link>
    <description>Deemed modvat credit under the 7-4-1986 Government of India order was available for steel flats purchased from a manufacturer operating under Notification No. 208/83-C.E. The order denied credit only for inputs clearly recognisable as non-duty paid or charged to nil rate of duty, and exempted goods were treated as different from goods subjected to nil duty under the tariff. Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was used to confirm that goods exempted by notification remain tariff goods, not necessarily nil-rated goods. The 2-5-1988 order, which later added &quot;wholly exempt from duty,&quot; showed the earlier order did not exclude wholly exempt inputs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 11:48:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (12) TMI 205 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80472</link>
      <description>Deemed modvat credit under the 7-4-1986 Government of India order was available for steel flats purchased from a manufacturer operating under Notification No. 208/83-C.E. The order denied credit only for inputs clearly recognisable as non-duty paid or charged to nil rate of duty, and exempted goods were treated as different from goods subjected to nil duty under the tariff. Section 3 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was used to confirm that goods exempted by notification remain tariff goods, not necessarily nil-rated goods. The 2-5-1988 order, which later added &quot;wholly exempt from duty,&quot; showed the earlier order did not exclude wholly exempt inputs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>