<?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 (6) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91859</link>
    <description>For recovery of wrongly availed credit under Rule 57-I(1), limitation runs from the date of taking credit, and a notice issued beyond six months from that date raises a strong prima facie time-bar case. On the facts stated, the demand was treated as time-barred on the face of the record, so waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:28:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=128920" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (6) TMI 146 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91859</link>
      <description>For recovery of wrongly availed credit under Rule 57-I(1), limitation runs from the date of taking credit, and a notice issued beyond six months from that date raises a strong prima facie time-bar case. On the facts stated, the demand was treated as time-barred on the face of the record, so waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were granted to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jun 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>