<?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 (11) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89429</link>
    <description>A small scale unit is not treated as having availed Modvat merely because it filed a declaration under Rule 57G if it did not actually take credit on inputs. On that footing, filing the declaration alone did not justify denial of the exemption under Notification No. 175/86. The demand for duty at tariff rate was therefore unsustainable, and the unit remained entitled to the exemption under paragraph a(ii) of the notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:26:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (11) TMI 171 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89429</link>
      <description>A small scale unit is not treated as having availed Modvat merely because it filed a declaration under Rule 57G if it did not actually take credit on inputs. On that footing, filing the declaration alone did not justify denial of the exemption under Notification No. 175/86. The demand for duty at tariff rate was therefore unsustainable, and the unit remained entitled to the exemption under paragraph a(ii) of the notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89429</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>