<?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>1994 (3) TMI 241 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83498</link>
    <description>Interpretation of Rule 57B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the time for taking Modvat credit were treated as questions of law. The text notes that, where no express time limit is prescribed, credit taken after receipt of inputs may be allowed within a reasonable period, and that consistency in decision-making supported treating the issue as referable. On that basis, the department&#039;s formulated question was referred to the High Court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 17:53:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 241 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83498</link>
      <description>Interpretation of Rule 57B of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and the time for taking Modvat credit were treated as questions of law. The text notes that, where no express time limit is prescribed, credit taken after receipt of inputs may be allowed within a reasonable period, and that consistency in decision-making supported treating the issue as referable. On that basis, the department&#039;s formulated question was referred to the High Court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>