<?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 (7) TMI 228 - COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89319</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods under Rule 57Q was considered in the context of alleged exclusive use of machines for exempted job-work goods under Notification No. 214/86. Credit is not available where capital goods are used solely for exempt final products, but the record also indicated manufacture and clearance of dutiable goods. The limited machine-utilisation records relied on by the adjudicating authority did not conclusively establish exclusive use for exempted manufacture, so the evidentiary basis was held insufficient to support a final denial of credit. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:30:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 228 - COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE,</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89319</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods under Rule 57Q was considered in the context of alleged exclusive use of machines for exempted job-work goods under Notification No. 214/86. Credit is not available where capital goods are used solely for exempt final products, but the record also indicated manufacture and clearance of dutiable goods. The limited machine-utilisation records relied on by the adjudicating authority did not conclusively establish exclusive use for exempted manufacture, so the evidentiary basis was held insufficient to support a final denial of credit. The matter was therefore remitted for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>