<?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>1996 (2) TMI 227 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85038</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was allowed on CRGO steel coils sent to job workers under challans where the records showed import duty payment, movement to job workers, and receipt of cores, with no evidence of excess credit or non-use; denial on lack of correlation was unsustainable. Deemed Modvat credit on goods described as M.S. Plates was refused because thickness, the decisive tariff criterion, was not established from the challans or supporting record, so the assessee failed to prove eligibility. The penalty was sustained because the Rule 57F(2) record-keeping and permission requirements were mandatory and had not been complied with.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 14:39:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122105" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (2) TMI 227 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85038</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was allowed on CRGO steel coils sent to job workers under challans where the records showed import duty payment, movement to job workers, and receipt of cores, with no evidence of excess credit or non-use; denial on lack of correlation was unsustainable. Deemed Modvat credit on goods described as M.S. Plates was refused because thickness, the decisive tariff criterion, was not established from the challans or supporting record, so the assessee failed to prove eligibility. The penalty was sustained because the Rule 57F(2) record-keeping and permission requirements were mandatory and had not been complied with.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85038</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>