<?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 (8) TMI 189 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92168</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on specified capital goods under Rule 57Q required fresh consideration because the earlier order had been passed before the Larger Bench ruling in Jawahar Mills clarified the scope of the rule and the relevant notifications. The prior denial could not stand without applying that binding interpretation to the admissibility claim. The matter was therefore remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo decision after granting the appellants a personal hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:36:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129229" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 189 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92168</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on specified capital goods under Rule 57Q required fresh consideration because the earlier order had been passed before the Larger Bench ruling in Jawahar Mills clarified the scope of the rule and the relevant notifications. The prior denial could not stand without applying that binding interpretation to the admissibility claim. The matter was therefore remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo decision after granting the appellants a personal hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>