<?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 (2) TMI 297 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87997</link>
    <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) was treated as dependent on whether the inputs were clearly identifiable as non-duty paid, charged to nil rate, or wholly exempt from duty within the Larger Bench interpretation. The mere fact that the goods had been manufactured earlier from duty-paid inputs did not, by itself, make credit admissible when the goods received at that stage had not suffered duty. On that basis, the credit was correctly disallowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:12:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 297 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87997</link>
      <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) was treated as dependent on whether the inputs were clearly identifiable as non-duty paid, charged to nil rate, or wholly exempt from duty within the Larger Bench interpretation. The mere fact that the goods had been manufactured earlier from duty-paid inputs did not, by itself, make credit admissible when the goods received at that stage had not suffered duty. On that basis, the credit was correctly disallowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>