<?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 (3) TMI 588 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109462</link>
    <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed because the applicants showed a prima facie case for interim relief. The authority noted that newsprint appeared to fall under Chapter Heading 48.01, and that Note 3 to Chapter 48 read with Notification No. 23/98-C.E. supported the department&#039;s classification position. It also held that the lower appellate authority had prima facie erred in treating the nil rate for newsprint as unconditional and in separating the tariff entry from the exemption notification. On that basis, the Modvat credit already availed on inputs and capital goods was treated as prima facie admissible pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 13:09:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 588 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109462</link>
      <description>Waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed because the applicants showed a prima facie case for interim relief. The authority noted that newsprint appeared to fall under Chapter Heading 48.01, and that Note 3 to Chapter 48 read with Notification No. 23/98-C.E. supported the department&#039;s classification position. It also held that the lower appellate authority had prima facie erred in treating the nil rate for newsprint as unconditional and in separating the tariff entry from the exemption notification. On that basis, the Modvat credit already availed on inputs and capital goods was treated as prima facie admissible pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109462</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>