<?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 (12) TMI 337 - CEGAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95265</link>
    <description>Denial of concessional duty under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. was held unsustainable where the assessee had taken Modvat credit on inputs and the record itself showed the duty-paid particulars of the raw materials. On those facts, the conclusion that duty-paid character of inputs had not been proved was not supported by the material on record, and the adjudicating authority was found to have ignored relevant facts. The exemption benefit could not therefore be denied, and the demand raised on that basis could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 12:53:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (12) TMI 337 - CEGAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95265</link>
      <description>Denial of concessional duty under Notification No. 14/92-C.E. was held unsustainable where the assessee had taken Modvat credit on inputs and the record itself showed the duty-paid particulars of the raw materials. On those facts, the conclusion that duty-paid character of inputs had not been proved was not supported by the material on record, and the adjudicating authority was found to have ignored relevant facts. The exemption benefit could not therefore be denied, and the demand raised on that basis could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95265</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>