<?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>1997 (3) TMI 192 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86608</link>
    <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) is not available where scrap or other inputs are clearly recognisable as non-duty paid. The applicable test, as stated in the cited Larger Bench line of decisions, requires examination of the nature of the goods and the surrounding purchase documents to decide whether the material can properly be treated as non-duty paid. Where the record is insufficient, physical verification of the scrap and reconsideration of the documentary evidence may be necessary. On the facts described, the matter was remanded for fresh verification by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, and the credit claim was not finally accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:39:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123675" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 192 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86608</link>
      <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) is not available where scrap or other inputs are clearly recognisable as non-duty paid. The applicable test, as stated in the cited Larger Bench line of decisions, requires examination of the nature of the goods and the surrounding purchase documents to decide whether the material can properly be treated as non-duty paid. Where the record is insufficient, physical verification of the scrap and reconsideration of the documentary evidence may be necessary. On the facts described, the matter was remanded for fresh verification by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, and the credit claim was not finally accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>