<?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 329 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90768</link>
    <description>Notification No. 175/86-C.E. did not require mandatory availment of Modvat credit as a condition for the concessional rate. Where the assessee had filed a declaration to avail Modvat credit but did not actually take the credit, and clearances remained within the prescribed exemption limit, denial of the notification benefit was unwarranted. The exemption was therefore available, and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 13:20:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127830" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 329 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90768</link>
      <description>Notification No. 175/86-C.E. did not require mandatory availment of Modvat credit as a condition for the concessional rate. Where the assessee had filed a declaration to avail Modvat credit but did not actually take the credit, and clearances remained within the prescribed exemption limit, denial of the notification benefit was unwarranted. The exemption was therefore available, and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90768</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>