<?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 (9) TMI 652 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113166</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on disputed capital goods used as components of manufacturing equipment, testing instruments, safety equipment and allied fittings, because they fell within the eligible scope of capital goods as understood in the Supreme Court ruling. Credit was not pressed for the Auto Ranging Conductivity Meter, since it was not covered by the declaration requirement under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules. The assessee succeeded to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 11:27:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150182" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 652 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113166</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on disputed capital goods used as components of manufacturing equipment, testing instruments, safety equipment and allied fittings, because they fell within the eligible scope of capital goods as understood in the Supreme Court ruling. Credit was not pressed for the Auto Ranging Conductivity Meter, since it was not covered by the declaration requirement under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules. The assessee succeeded to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113166</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>