<?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>2003 (4) TMI 417 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108471</link>
    <description>Air-conditioning units installed in a factory control room were treated as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because they were used within the factory and not shown to be for an office or other non-factory purpose. Credit could not be denied merely on the basis that the equipment regulated the control room temperature. The earlier restrictive view on such equipment was not applied in light of the later larger Bench position, and Modvat credit was therefore admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:27:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145488" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (4) TMI 417 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108471</link>
      <description>Air-conditioning units installed in a factory control room were treated as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, because they were used within the factory and not shown to be for an office or other non-factory purpose. Credit could not be denied merely on the basis that the equipment regulated the control room temperature. The earlier restrictive view on such equipment was not applied in light of the later larger Bench position, and Modvat credit was therefore admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108471</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>