<?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 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114334</link>
    <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal contested the denial of credit for various items, including Lead Sheets, Eyebolt &amp;amp; Nut, D&#039; Canter Spares, Cable tray, M.S. Tank, and Timer, along with the confirmation of a penalty. The judgment allowed credit for items 1 to 4, deemed as machinery components, while denying credit for the M.S. Tank and Timer. The penalty was set aside due to the absence of deliberate wrongful credit claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 17:44:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114334</link>
      <description>The appellant&#039;s appeal contested the denial of credit for various items, including Lead Sheets, Eyebolt &amp;amp; Nut, D&#039; Canter Spares, Cable tray, M.S. Tank, and Timer, along with the confirmation of a penalty. The judgment allowed credit for items 1 to 4, deemed as machinery components, while denying credit for the M.S. Tank and Timer. The penalty was set aside due to the absence of deliberate wrongful credit claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>