<?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 (11) TMI 974 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99908</link>
    <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because goods were exported through merchant exporters and the manufacturer had not furnished a disclaimer certificate, where the fact of export was undisputed. The Tribunal held that the authorities had relied on an inapplicable decision and followed the later view that export under bond through merchant exporters does not, by itself, disentitle the manufacturer to credit. On that basis, the denial of Modvat credit was found unjustified and consequential relief was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:37:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136960" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 974 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99908</link>
      <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because goods were exported through merchant exporters and the manufacturer had not furnished a disclaimer certificate, where the fact of export was undisputed. The Tribunal held that the authorities had relied on an inapplicable decision and followed the later view that export under bond through merchant exporters does not, by itself, disentitle the manufacturer to credit. On that basis, the denial of Modvat credit was found unjustified and consequential relief was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>