<?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>1998 (6) TMI 134 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88683</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was held not to be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration was not filed before receipt of inputs, where the credit in the Modvat register was taken only after the declaration was filed and acknowledged and utilisation began only after compliance. The dispute arose in the initial phase of the Modvat scheme, when the prescribed declaration format was notified later, and the reasoning in the assessee&#039;s earlier case was applied to those facts. On that basis, receipt of inputs before filing the declaration was not treated as a disqualifying circumstance, and the demand and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:36:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (6) TMI 134 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88683</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was held not to be denied merely because the Rule 57G declaration was not filed before receipt of inputs, where the credit in the Modvat register was taken only after the declaration was filed and acknowledged and utilisation began only after compliance. The dispute arose in the initial phase of the Modvat scheme, when the prescribed declaration format was notified later, and the reasoning in the assessee&#039;s earlier case was applied to those facts. On that basis, receipt of inputs before filing the declaration was not treated as a disqualifying circumstance, and the demand and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>