<?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 (12) TMI 184 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86310</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on the disputed inputs under Rule 57A because the departmental reliance on earlier decisions about moulds and foundry fluxes was found inapplicable to the facts. The Tribunal noted that in the assessee&#039;s own earlier proceedings, credit on the same issue had already been allowed, and the lower authorities had followed those orders. No infirmity was found in granting credit, so the departmental challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 18:35:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123377" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (12) TMI 184 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86310</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on the disputed inputs under Rule 57A because the departmental reliance on earlier decisions about moulds and foundry fluxes was found inapplicable to the facts. The Tribunal noted that in the assessee&#039;s own earlier proceedings, credit on the same issue had already been allowed, and the lower authorities had followed those orders. No infirmity was found in granting credit, so the departmental challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>