<?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 (8) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85570</link>
    <description>A stay application concerning Modvat credit under Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules was treated as raising a serious and debatable issue, including the contention that duty on the intermediate product would have given corresponding credit at another unit and that the revenue impact was neutral. The Tribunal declined full waiver of the pre-deposit, but granted partial interim protection by requiring a deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs and staying recovery of the balance during the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 18:14:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122637" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (8) TMI 193 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85570</link>
      <description>A stay application concerning Modvat credit under Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules was treated as raising a serious and debatable issue, including the contention that duty on the intermediate product would have given corresponding credit at another unit and that the revenue impact was neutral. The Tribunal declined full waiver of the pre-deposit, but granted partial interim protection by requiring a deposit of Rs. 2 lakhs and staying recovery of the balance during the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>