<?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>1991 (4) TMI 229 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81280</link>
    <description>Advance rebate credit under the excess production sugar scheme could be retrenched where part of the sugar was later lost in reprocessing and was not ultimately cleared, because the concession was linked to fulfilment of the clearance condition. The majority held that recovery was legally permissible subject to the governing requirements on provisionality and recovery. On limitation, the relevant period for recovery ran from the date of the credit, but the record did not clearly establish whether the assessment was provisional, which remained material to the validity of the demand. The matter therefore required factual determination on provisionality before recovery could be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 15:35:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (4) TMI 229 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81280</link>
      <description>Advance rebate credit under the excess production sugar scheme could be retrenched where part of the sugar was later lost in reprocessing and was not ultimately cleared, because the concession was linked to fulfilment of the clearance condition. The majority held that recovery was legally permissible subject to the governing requirements on provisionality and recovery. On limitation, the relevant period for recovery ran from the date of the credit, but the record did not clearly establish whether the assessment was provisional, which remained material to the validity of the demand. The matter therefore required factual determination on provisionality before recovery could be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>