<?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 (4) TMI 257 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85427</link>
    <description>The extended period of limitation could not be invoked because the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and there was no suppression or wilful misstatement, so the demand was time-barred. Rule 57D(1) also protected Modvat credit where manufacture yielded waste, refuse or by-product; the credit could not be denied or varied merely because scrap arose during manufacture and was cleared on payment of duty. The assessee therefore succeeded on both limitation and merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Aug 2011 18:44:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 257 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85427</link>
      <description>The extended period of limitation could not be invoked because the assessee had disclosed the relevant facts and there was no suppression or wilful misstatement, so the demand was time-barred. Rule 57D(1) also protected Modvat credit where manufacture yielded waste, refuse or by-product; the credit could not be denied or varied merely because scrap arose during manufacture and was cleared on payment of duty. The assessee therefore succeeded on both limitation and merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>