<?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 (10) TMI 959 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105372</link>
    <description>Computer systems were not treated as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q because they were not shown to be used in the manufacture of excisable goods or to form part of the manufacturing line. Their use for production planning, monitoring, design, drafting and sketching was regarded as incidental rather than constituting direct manufacturing use. The later exclusion of Chapter 8471 was treated as clarificatory of the earlier position, and the broader Bench ruling relied on by the assessee was distinguished on the basis that the factual finding here remained that the system was not used for manufacture. Credit disallowance was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 14:46:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142410" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 959 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105372</link>
      <description>Computer systems were not treated as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q because they were not shown to be used in the manufacture of excisable goods or to form part of the manufacturing line. Their use for production planning, monitoring, design, drafting and sketching was regarded as incidental rather than constituting direct manufacturing use. The later exclusion of Chapter 8471 was treated as clarificatory of the earlier position, and the broader Bench ruling relied on by the assessee was distinguished on the basis that the factual finding here remained that the system was not used for manufacture. Credit disallowance was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>