<?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>2004 (5) TMI 354 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111777</link>
    <description>Flip trolleys and pin trolleys were examined for eligibility to Modvat credit as capital goods under Rule 57Q. The Revenue argued that the goods fell under Chapter 87 and were outside the capital goods definition, while the assessee relied on the manufacturer&#039;s classification under Heading 7326.90 and duty payment on that basis. On that classification, the trolleys were treated as capital goods, and denial of Modvat credit was not accepted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:18:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=148793" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 354 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111777</link>
      <description>Flip trolleys and pin trolleys were examined for eligibility to Modvat credit as capital goods under Rule 57Q. The Revenue argued that the goods fell under Chapter 87 and were outside the capital goods definition, while the assessee relied on the manufacturer&#039;s classification under Heading 7326.90 and duty payment on that basis. On that classification, the trolleys were treated as capital goods, and denial of Modvat credit was not accepted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>