<?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 (12) TMI 120 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82280</link>
    <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was refused in a Modvat credit dispute under Rule 57-I concerning scrap cleared after an exempted period. At the stay stage, the department&#039;s method of linking disallowance to inputs used in manufacturing exempted final products was found tenable in principle, while the precise quantification of credit was left for final hearing. The limitation objection failed because the proposed credit adjustment was treated as outside Section 11A for the exempted-period disallowance, and the notice covering later dutiable scrap clearances was within time. Financial hardship was also rejected on the basis of balance-sheet figures showing substantial turnover, profit, and liquid funds, and the appellants were directed to deposit the duty demanded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 10:59:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (12) TMI 120 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82280</link>
      <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was refused in a Modvat credit dispute under Rule 57-I concerning scrap cleared after an exempted period. At the stay stage, the department&#039;s method of linking disallowance to inputs used in manufacturing exempted final products was found tenable in principle, while the precise quantification of credit was left for final hearing. The limitation objection failed because the proposed credit adjustment was treated as outside Section 11A for the exempted-period disallowance, and the notice covering later dutiable scrap clearances was within time. Financial hardship was also rejected on the basis of balance-sheet figures showing substantial turnover, profit, and liquid funds, and the appellants were directed to deposit the duty demanded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>