<?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 (5) TMI 227 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85643</link>
    <description>Printing ink used to test printing machines before delivery was treated as an input for Modvat credit because the machines had to be tested to ensure proper functioning before customer acceptance, and materials used to make finished goods marketable can qualify as inputs under the Central Excise Rules. On that basis, the demand and penalty were not sustained. The limitation objection regarding the earlier period was not examined in view of this conclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 13:16:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 227 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85643</link>
      <description>Printing ink used to test printing machines before delivery was treated as an input for Modvat credit because the machines had to be tested to ensure proper functioning before customer acceptance, and materials used to make finished goods marketable can qualify as inputs under the Central Excise Rules. On that basis, the demand and penalty were not sustained. The limitation objection regarding the earlier period was not examined in view of this conclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>