<?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>2000 (2) TMI 279 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93310</link>
    <description>LDO used to generate steam for keeping rollers hot in the manufacturing process was treated as an eligible input for Modvat credit, following the principle that fuel used to generate energy or steam integrally consumed in manufacture qualifies for credit. Modvat credit was also held admissible on the original invoice copy for the relevant period because prevailing trade notices and supporting Supreme Court authority accepted that document as sufficient. Credit further survived a mere change in management, as continuity of manufacture from the same inputs did not extinguish otherwise admissible credit. The demand and penalty were set aside, with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 17:31:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 279 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93310</link>
      <description>LDO used to generate steam for keeping rollers hot in the manufacturing process was treated as an eligible input for Modvat credit, following the principle that fuel used to generate energy or steam integrally consumed in manufacture qualifies for credit. Modvat credit was also held admissible on the original invoice copy for the relevant period because prevailing trade notices and supporting Supreme Court authority accepted that document as sufficient. Credit further survived a mere change in management, as continuity of manufacture from the same inputs did not extinguish otherwise admissible credit. The demand and penalty were set aside, with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>