<?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>1990 (3) TMI 178 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80511</link>
    <description>Oxygen and acetylene used for cutting runners and risers in castings qualify as Modvat inputs when consumed in the manufacturing process, because consumable items are not treated as tools merely by association with cutting equipment and exclusions must be construed strictly. The gases also qualify where welding forms part of manufacture, but not when used for repair or maintenance outside the production process. Credit claimed on photostat copies of gate passes was not accepted as a matter of course where original documents were expected, yet the assessee was entitled to a fresh hearing because adequate opportunity had not been provided, requiring reconsideration by the original authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 13:30:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=117657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (3) TMI 178 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80511</link>
      <description>Oxygen and acetylene used for cutting runners and risers in castings qualify as Modvat inputs when consumed in the manufacturing process, because consumable items are not treated as tools merely by association with cutting equipment and exclusions must be construed strictly. The gases also qualify where welding forms part of manufacture, but not when used for repair or maintenance outside the production process. Credit claimed on photostat copies of gate passes was not accepted as a matter of course where original documents were expected, yet the assessee was entitled to a fresh hearing because adequate opportunity had not been provided, requiring reconsideration by the original authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=80511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>