<?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>1999 (3) TMI 258 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91753</link>
    <description>Where Modvat credit was unavailable for hot re-rollable products, credit in RG 23A Part II was treated as an inadequate remedy and consequential credit in PLA could be sought. The Tribunal nevertheless made that relief conditional on verification that the duty burden had not been passed on to customers. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to examine the evidence on unjust enrichment and determine whether the bar applied before PLA credit was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:48:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128815" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 258 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91753</link>
      <description>Where Modvat credit was unavailable for hot re-rollable products, credit in RG 23A Part II was treated as an inadequate remedy and consequential credit in PLA could be sought. The Tribunal nevertheless made that relief conditional on verification that the duty burden had not been passed on to customers. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to examine the evidence on unjust enrichment and determine whether the bar applied before PLA credit was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91753</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>