<?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>2005 (4) TMI 366 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115335</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on inputs was barred because the final products were cleared without payment of duty under an exemption procedure and were fully exempt, attracting Rule 57C; the disallowance of credit was therefore upheld. Penalty was not warranted because the assessee had acted in accordance with an earlier Tribunal view and the legal position was unsettled during the relevant period; the penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 12:10:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152334" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (4) TMI 366 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115335</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on inputs was barred because the final products were cleared without payment of duty under an exemption procedure and were fully exempt, attracting Rule 57C; the disallowance of credit was therefore upheld. Penalty was not warranted because the assessee had acted in accordance with an earlier Tribunal view and the legal position was unsettled during the relevant period; the penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115335</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>