<?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 (10) TMI 193 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82254</link>
    <description>MODVAT credit should not be denied merely for procedural non-compliance where duty-paid inputs were sent to a job worker after intimation, the processing occurred within the excise control framework, and the intermediate goods were returned to the assessee. The scheme&#039;s purpose is satisfied when contemporaneous records verify the use of inputs, manufacture of the intermediate product, and return of goods without diversion. Payment of duty by the job worker does not, by itself, bar credit if the substantive conditions of the scheme are met. The matter therefore required reconsideration on the verified facts rather than rejection on procedural grounds alone.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 18:38:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119399" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (10) TMI 193 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82254</link>
      <description>MODVAT credit should not be denied merely for procedural non-compliance where duty-paid inputs were sent to a job worker after intimation, the processing occurred within the excise control framework, and the intermediate goods were returned to the assessee. The scheme&#039;s purpose is satisfied when contemporaneous records verify the use of inputs, manufacture of the intermediate product, and return of goods without diversion. Payment of duty by the job worker does not, by itself, bar credit if the substantive conditions of the scheme are met. The matter therefore required reconsideration on the verified facts rather than rejection on procedural grounds alone.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82254</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>