<?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>2001 (2) TMI 360 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95481</link>
    <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A was treated as usable for clearance of a related final product where both goods fell within the same tariff item, and the notification did not confine the input to one specified output. On that basis, the Tribunal found a strong prima facie case against insisting on predeposit for the duty demand arising from alleged irregular utilisation of credit. Unconditional dispensation of predeposit was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Dec 2011 17:20:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 360 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95481</link>
      <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A was treated as usable for clearance of a related final product where both goods fell within the same tariff item, and the notification did not confine the input to one specified output. On that basis, the Tribunal found a strong prima facie case against insisting on predeposit for the duty demand arising from alleged irregular utilisation of credit. Unconditional dispensation of predeposit was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95481</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>