<?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 300 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92666</link>
    <description>Filing a declaration under Rule 57G does not, by itself, extinguish exemption under Notification No. 175/86. Where Modvat credit on inputs was not availed and the assessee did not satisfy the condition for the concessional-rate entry, the goods could still fall within Clause 1(a)(ii) at the nil rate. The demand of duty at the full rate was therefore not sustainable, because mere procedural declaration could not defeat a benefit otherwise available under the notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 12:23:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (3) TMI 300 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92666</link>
      <description>Filing a declaration under Rule 57G does not, by itself, extinguish exemption under Notification No. 175/86. Where Modvat credit on inputs was not availed and the assessee did not satisfy the condition for the concessional-rate entry, the goods could still fall within Clause 1(a)(ii) at the nil rate. The demand of duty at the full rate was therefore not sustainable, because mere procedural declaration could not defeat a benefit otherwise available under the notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92666</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>