<?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>1995 (8) TMI 122 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84443</link>
    <description>Metal cuttings, off-cuts and remnants cleared after use of duty-paid inputs were not automatically classifiable as waste and scrap merely because they arose from processing. The tariff definition applied only where the material arose from manufacture or mechanical working and was not usable as such; genuine trimmings and shearings could still qualify as wastage. In the Modvat context, recovery for inputs disposed of otherwise than as contemplated by the scheme was treated as governed by the provision for non-accounted inputs, so limitation ran from that framework rather than from the original credit date. On the facts, the duty demand was largely sustained, limited relief was preserved for genuine wastage, and the penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 10:38:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121587" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (8) TMI 122 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84443</link>
      <description>Metal cuttings, off-cuts and remnants cleared after use of duty-paid inputs were not automatically classifiable as waste and scrap merely because they arose from processing. The tariff definition applied only where the material arose from manufacture or mechanical working and was not usable as such; genuine trimmings and shearings could still qualify as wastage. In the Modvat context, recovery for inputs disposed of otherwise than as contemplated by the scheme was treated as governed by the provision for non-accounted inputs, so limitation ran from that framework rather than from the original credit date. On the facts, the duty demand was largely sustained, limited relief was preserved for genuine wastage, and the penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84443</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>