<?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>1992 (3) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81783</link>
    <description>Lead used in the galvanisation process qualified as an input for Modvat credit because the governing test was whether the material was used in or in relation to manufacture of the final product, not whether it remained physically present in the finished goods. The material&#039;s use with zinc had a sufficient manufacturing nexus and no specific exclusion under the rule or notification was shown, so denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:51:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=118928" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (3) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81783</link>
      <description>Lead used in the galvanisation process qualified as an input for Modvat credit because the governing test was whether the material was used in or in relation to manufacture of the final product, not whether it remained physically present in the finished goods. The material&#039;s use with zinc had a sufficient manufacturing nexus and no specific exclusion under the rule or notification was shown, so denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=81783</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>