<?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 (6) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85801</link>
    <description>Rule 57Q permitted Modvat credit on duty paid capital goods used in the factory, and its definition of capital goods extended to components, spare parts and accessories of plant or machinery. Switches and related panel-board items used in a chemical plant were treated as part of that plant, because the plant itself was capital goods and the items functioned as its components or spare parts. The wider scope of clause (b) was overlooked by the lower authorities, and the later amendment by Notification No. 14/96-C.E. did not take away credit already available under the earlier rule. The appellant was therefore entitled to Modvat credit on the disputed items.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 12:30:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85801</link>
      <description>Rule 57Q permitted Modvat credit on duty paid capital goods used in the factory, and its definition of capital goods extended to components, spare parts and accessories of plant or machinery. Switches and related panel-board items used in a chemical plant were treated as part of that plant, because the plant itself was capital goods and the items functioned as its components or spare parts. The wider scope of clause (b) was overlooked by the lower authorities, and the later amendment by Notification No. 14/96-C.E. did not take away credit already available under the earlier rule. The appellant was therefore entitled to Modvat credit on the disputed items.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>