<?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 (2) TMI 561 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112893</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods taken under a leave and licence arrangement depended on lawful receipt under a genuine written arrangement, not on absolute ownership alone; the document text says the majority treated the alleged agreement as belated and colourable, and the credit issue was ultimately resolved in the assessee&#039;s favour by the third member and majority order. On limitation and penalties, the majority found nondisclosure of material facts justified invocation of the extended period and sustained penalty action in principle, while reducing the quantum of penalties. The final majority view is stated to have set aside the impugned order and granted substantive relief to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 14:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149909" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 561 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112893</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods taken under a leave and licence arrangement depended on lawful receipt under a genuine written arrangement, not on absolute ownership alone; the document text says the majority treated the alleged agreement as belated and colourable, and the credit issue was ultimately resolved in the assessee&#039;s favour by the third member and majority order. On limitation and penalties, the majority found nondisclosure of material facts justified invocation of the extended period and sustained penalty action in principle, while reducing the quantum of penalties. The final majority view is stated to have set aside the impugned order and granted substantive relief to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>