<?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 (5) TMI 707 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100135</link>
    <description>Rule 57T allowed Modvat credit on capital goods only if the declaration was filed before receipt of the goods, with delayed filing condonable in ordinary cases up to one month and, in exceptional cases, by a further two months. The provision created a strict outer limit of three months, after which the Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to condone delay, even if the delay was inadvertent or bona fide. A declaration filed beyond that period could not be validly condoned, and Modvat credit was not admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:02:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 707 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100135</link>
      <description>Rule 57T allowed Modvat credit on capital goods only if the declaration was filed before receipt of the goods, with delayed filing condonable in ordinary cases up to one month and, in exceptional cases, by a further two months. The provision created a strict outer limit of three months, after which the Assistant Commissioner had no jurisdiction to condone delay, even if the delay was inadvertent or bona fide. A declaration filed beyond that period could not be validly condoned, and Modvat credit was not admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100135</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>