<?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 (8) TMI 220 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87381</link>
    <description>Omission to mention Chapter Heading 8703 in an initial Modvat declaration was treated as a procedural lapse where the inputs used for manufacture of public passenger motor vehicles were the same, receipt and utilisation of inputs were undisputed, and the assessee had disclosed the relevant heading in other records and later in a revised declaration before the show cause notice. A broad description in the declaration and a minor variation in sub-heading did not defeat credit when substantive conditions were satisfied and there was no misuse or cross-use of inputs. Modvat credit was therefore allowable and penalty was unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 16:06:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124448" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 220 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87381</link>
      <description>Omission to mention Chapter Heading 8703 in an initial Modvat declaration was treated as a procedural lapse where the inputs used for manufacture of public passenger motor vehicles were the same, receipt and utilisation of inputs were undisputed, and the assessee had disclosed the relevant heading in other records and later in a revised declaration before the show cause notice. A broad description in the declaration and a minor variation in sub-heading did not defeat credit when substantive conditions were satisfied and there was no misuse or cross-use of inputs. Modvat credit was therefore allowable and penalty was unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87381</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>