<?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 (6) TMI 560 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114331</link>
    <description>Rule 57H, which begins with a non-obstante clause, overrides the restriction in Rule 57G where Modvat credit is claimed under Rule 57H. On the stated facts, the inputs were duty paid and the assessee became eligible to take credit only on 16-3-1995, so credit could not have been validly taken earlier merely on the basis of pre-31-3-1994 gate passes. The conditions for Rule 57H were therefore satisfied, and the Revenue&#039;s objection founded on Rule 57G was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 17:41:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 560 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114331</link>
      <description>Rule 57H, which begins with a non-obstante clause, overrides the restriction in Rule 57G where Modvat credit is claimed under Rule 57H. On the stated facts, the inputs were duty paid and the assessee became eligible to take credit only on 16-3-1995, so credit could not have been validly taken earlier merely on the basis of pre-31-3-1994 gate passes. The conditions for Rule 57H were therefore satisfied, and the Revenue&#039;s objection founded on Rule 57G was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>