<?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>1993 (2) TMI 180 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82408</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on a common input used in manufacturing several dutiable final products could be utilised against any declared final product where the inputs were covered by a valid declaration. Rule 57A allows credit on inputs used in or in relation to manufacture, Rule 57F(1) requires only such use for the declared products, and Rule 57F(3)(i) permits utilisation of credit towards duty on any of those products. Rule 57G(3) requires RG 23A maintenance but does not mandate product-wise correlation or quantum-wise apportionment. In the absence of any notification or order restricting credit, denial merely because credit earned on one product exceeded duty on that product was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 18:30:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119553" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (2) TMI 180 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82408</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on a common input used in manufacturing several dutiable final products could be utilised against any declared final product where the inputs were covered by a valid declaration. Rule 57A allows credit on inputs used in or in relation to manufacture, Rule 57F(1) requires only such use for the declared products, and Rule 57F(3)(i) permits utilisation of credit towards duty on any of those products. Rule 57G(3) requires RG 23A maintenance but does not mandate product-wise correlation or quantum-wise apportionment. In the absence of any notification or order restricting credit, denial merely because credit earned on one product exceeded duty on that product was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>