<?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 (9) TMI 542 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95538</link>
    <description>H.R. plates used to manufacture plate rings were treated as structural or building material and not as capital goods under Rule 57Q, so Modvat credit on that basis was rejected. The alternative claim for input credit under Rule 57A was not foreclosed, because it depended on verification of duty payment on the plate rings in which the plates were used. That claim was remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for examination and fresh consideration on the relevant evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:47:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132597" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (9) TMI 542 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95538</link>
      <description>H.R. plates used to manufacture plate rings were treated as structural or building material and not as capital goods under Rule 57Q, so Modvat credit on that basis was rejected. The alternative claim for input credit under Rule 57A was not foreclosed, because it depended on verification of duty payment on the plate rings in which the plates were used. That claim was remanded to the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner for examination and fresh consideration on the relevant evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>