<?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 257 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87806</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was unavailable for common inputs used in both dutiable and exempted final products where Rule 57C applied to inputs consumed in the exempted product. A declaration filed for credit purposes had not disclosed that the inputs were also used for flexible layflat tubing cleared at nil duty, and entries in classification lists, RG 23A records and RT 12 returns did not cure that omission. The later plea of bona fide mistake was rejected because the exempted product had already been shown in the classification list and exemption had been claimed. On those facts, the extended limitation period applied and the demand was not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:59:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (8) TMI 257 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87806</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was unavailable for common inputs used in both dutiable and exempted final products where Rule 57C applied to inputs consumed in the exempted product. A declaration filed for credit purposes had not disclosed that the inputs were also used for flexible layflat tubing cleared at nil duty, and entries in classification lists, RG 23A records and RT 12 returns did not cure that omission. The later plea of bona fide mistake was rejected because the exempted product had already been shown in the classification list and exemption had been claimed. On those facts, the extended limitation period applied and the demand was not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>