<?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 (10) TMI 210 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81013</link>
    <description>MODVAT credit remained available where inputs removed under Rule 57F(2) were used by a job worker to make intermediate products and returned after duty payment. The rule permits duty-paid inputs to be sent out for manufacture of intermediates and brought back for further use in final products; it does not prescribe the exact mode of clearance from the job worker&#039;s premises. Payment of duty by the job worker on the intermediates did not take the transaction outside the MODVAT scheme, and the manufacturer could take credit of the duty actually paid. The benefit could not be denied on the ground that the goods were not cleared under the exemption route.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:00:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (10) TMI 210 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81013</link>
      <description>MODVAT credit remained available where inputs removed under Rule 57F(2) were used by a job worker to make intermediate products and returned after duty payment. The rule permits duty-paid inputs to be sent out for manufacture of intermediates and brought back for further use in final products; it does not prescribe the exact mode of clearance from the job worker&#039;s premises. Payment of duty by the job worker on the intermediates did not take the transaction outside the MODVAT scheme, and the manufacturer could take credit of the duty actually paid. The benefit could not be denied on the ground that the goods were not cleared under the exemption route.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>