<?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 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109608</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was treated as admissible on High Chrome Grinding Media, Water Treatment Chemicals, LDO and Lubricants because a separate input declaration was not regarded as indispensable where the declaration already filed served the Modvat purpose. Items claimed as machinery parts, including plates, fabrics, lining plates, ceramic fibre blankets, corrugated sheets and similar goods, required fresh examination because their exact use was not satisfactorily established; the matter was remanded for reconsideration on evidence of use and eligibility as capital goods or inputs. Credit on SGR Motor was disallowed because it had been taken on the strength of the original invoice, which was held to be legally insufficient.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 19:00:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=146625" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109608</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was treated as admissible on High Chrome Grinding Media, Water Treatment Chemicals, LDO and Lubricants because a separate input declaration was not regarded as indispensable where the declaration already filed served the Modvat purpose. Items claimed as machinery parts, including plates, fabrics, lining plates, ceramic fibre blankets, corrugated sheets and similar goods, required fresh examination because their exact use was not satisfactorily established; the matter was remanded for reconsideration on evidence of use and eligibility as capital goods or inputs. Credit on SGR Motor was disallowed because it had been taken on the strength of the original invoice, which was held to be legally insufficient.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=109608</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>