<?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 630 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97747</link>
    <description>Delay in filing a Modvat declaration under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was capable of condonation where the rules expressly permitted it and the lapse was only a short procedural delay. Refusal to consider condonation merely because no separate application had been filed was unwarranted. The delay was condoned and the Modvat credit on inputs was held admissible, with consequential relief to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 630 - CEGAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97747</link>
      <description>Delay in filing a Modvat declaration under the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was capable of condonation where the rules expressly permitted it and the lapse was only a short procedural delay. Refusal to consider condonation merely because no separate application had been filed was unwarranted. The delay was condoned and the Modvat credit on inputs was held admissible, with consequential relief to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>