<?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>1995 (12) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87734</link>
    <description>Rule 57H operated as a transitional provision to extend Modvat credit for duty-paid inputs where acknowledgment of the Rule 57G declaration had not yet been obtained. The provision covered both inputs lying in stock or received after filing the declaration and inputs already used in the manufacture of final products cleared from the factory on or after 1-3-1987. The Tribunal followed the cited High Court view that the second limb was not excluded merely because the declaration was filed later, so credit remained available for qualifying inputs. The denial of Modvat credit was therefore unsustainable, and the appellants were entitled to the credit under Rule 57H.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:08:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124800" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (12) TMI 195 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87734</link>
      <description>Rule 57H operated as a transitional provision to extend Modvat credit for duty-paid inputs where acknowledgment of the Rule 57G declaration had not yet been obtained. The provision covered both inputs lying in stock or received after filing the declaration and inputs already used in the manufacture of final products cleared from the factory on or after 1-3-1987. The Tribunal followed the cited High Court view that the second limb was not excluded merely because the declaration was filed later, so credit remained available for qualifying inputs. The denial of Modvat credit was therefore unsustainable, and the appellants were entitled to the credit under Rule 57H.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>