<?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 (11) TMI 471 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115782</link>
    <description>Mere conversion of an existing product into another version did not amount to manufacture because no new commercially distinct article emerged, so duty on the converted crane was not sustainable. Modvat credit could not be denied where the stock-transfer and internal records did not support the assumption that duty-paid goods were cleared without accounting, and the demand was inadequately quantified. Modvat credit for inputs allegedly used in repair or replacement was also unsustainable where the evidence showed no such inputs were drawn. As the substantive demands failed, the related penalty and interest could not stand, and in any event the cited penal and interest provisions were not applicable to the relevant period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 18:23:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152780" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 471 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115782</link>
      <description>Mere conversion of an existing product into another version did not amount to manufacture because no new commercially distinct article emerged, so duty on the converted crane was not sustainable. Modvat credit could not be denied where the stock-transfer and internal records did not support the assumption that duty-paid goods were cleared without accounting, and the demand was inadequately quantified. Modvat credit for inputs allegedly used in repair or replacement was also unsustainable where the evidence showed no such inputs were drawn. As the substantive demands failed, the related penalty and interest could not stand, and in any event the cited penal and interest provisions were not applicable to the relevant period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115782</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>