<?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 (3) TMI 282 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85256</link>
    <description>Higher notional MODVAT credit under Rule 57B was available only where the inputs were cleared under an exemption notification granting partial duty relief by reference to clearance limits and that notification itself provided for such higher credit. The suppliers had exhausted Notification No. 175/86 up to the prescribed limit and thereafter cleared the goods under Notification No. 72/86, which did not confer higher notional credit. On those facts, the goods received by the appellants could not be treated as eligible clearances under Notification No. 175/86 for Rule 57B purposes, so the credit claim was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Aug 2011 17:44:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122323" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (3) TMI 282 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85256</link>
      <description>Higher notional MODVAT credit under Rule 57B was available only where the inputs were cleared under an exemption notification granting partial duty relief by reference to clearance limits and that notification itself provided for such higher credit. The suppliers had exhausted Notification No. 175/86 up to the prescribed limit and thereafter cleared the goods under Notification No. 72/86, which did not confer higher notional credit. On those facts, the goods received by the appellants could not be treated as eligible clearances under Notification No. 175/86 for Rule 57B purposes, so the credit claim was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>