<?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 (7) TMI 561 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109603</link>
    <description>Credit validly earned under a prevailing Modvat scheme could not be reversed merely because a later notification withdrew eligibility for future inputs. The inputs were eligible when the credit was taken, the withdrawal notification was not retrospective, and there was no finding that the credit had been wrongly availed at inception. The accrued entitlement was treated as indefeasible, so the assessee was entitled to retain the Modvat credit and the Revenue&#039;s objection failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:50:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 561 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109603</link>
      <description>Credit validly earned under a prevailing Modvat scheme could not be reversed merely because a later notification withdrew eligibility for future inputs. The inputs were eligible when the credit was taken, the withdrawal notification was not retrospective, and there was no finding that the credit had been wrongly availed at inception. The accrued entitlement was treated as indefeasible, so the assessee was entitled to retain the Modvat credit and the Revenue&#039;s objection failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>