<?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 262 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89799</link>
    <description>Deemed Modvat credit was treated as admissible on waste and scrap of iron and steel bought from the market because the Department failed to prove that the inputs were clearly recognisable as non-duty paid. The Tribunal read that expression to include goods on which duty was not paid, including wholly exempt goods and conditionally exempt goods where compliance with exemption conditions is not shown. It further held that, where credit is denied on that basis, the burden lies on the Department to establish the non-duty-paid character by evidence. On the facts, no such evidence was produced, so the disallowance and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 17:29:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 262 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89799</link>
      <description>Deemed Modvat credit was treated as admissible on waste and scrap of iron and steel bought from the market because the Department failed to prove that the inputs were clearly recognisable as non-duty paid. The Tribunal read that expression to include goods on which duty was not paid, including wholly exempt goods and conditionally exempt goods where compliance with exemption conditions is not shown. It further held that, where credit is denied on that basis, the burden lies on the Department to establish the non-duty-paid character by evidence. On the facts, no such evidence was produced, so the disallowance and penalty could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89799</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>