<?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 565 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114336</link>
    <description>Rule 57Q(2)(ii) does not bar Modvat credit on capital goods before installation where the goods are components, spares or accessories. On the facts, the items were treated as spares, so the restriction on pre-installation credit did not apply. Because the demand and penalty were founded on the incorrect premise that credit was unavailable until installation, the basis of the proceedings failed. The penalty was therefore not sustainable, and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:04:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151335" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 565 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114336</link>
      <description>Rule 57Q(2)(ii) does not bar Modvat credit on capital goods before installation where the goods are components, spares or accessories. On the facts, the items were treated as spares, so the restriction on pre-installation credit did not apply. Because the demand and penalty were founded on the incorrect premise that credit was unavailable until installation, the basis of the proceedings failed. The penalty was therefore not sustainable, and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>