<?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 (3) TMI 218 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82529</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on inputs used for declared final products was examined in the context of clearances made free of duty under an exemption notification. The note contrasts Rule 57C, which denies credit where the final product is wholly exempt or taxed at nil rate, with Rule 57F(3)(i), and records the competing views on whether conditional exemption under Chapter X affects credit reversal. It stresses harmonious construction of the rules and notes the concern that credit should not be retained where the final product does not suffer duty. Because Tribunal decisions and High Court authorities were in conflict, the matter was referred for larger Bench consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2011 16:58:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=119674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (3) TMI 218 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82529</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on inputs used for declared final products was examined in the context of clearances made free of duty under an exemption notification. The note contrasts Rule 57C, which denies credit where the final product is wholly exempt or taxed at nil rate, with Rule 57F(3)(i), and records the competing views on whether conditional exemption under Chapter X affects credit reversal. It stresses harmonious construction of the rules and notes the concern that credit should not be retained where the final product does not suffer duty. Because Tribunal decisions and High Court authorities were in conflict, the matter was referred for larger Bench consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>