<?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 (3) TMI 682 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116189</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was denied because the Rule 57G declarations covered different goods and a different classification from the conveyor chain on which credit was taken. The declaration for the actual goods was filed only after availment of credit and after the show-cause notice, so it could not cure the defect. The requirement of filing a specific declaration was treated as a substantive condition for availing Modvat credit, and non-compliance disentitled the assessee from the benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jun 2012 17:14:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153187" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (3) TMI 682 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116189</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was denied because the Rule 57G declarations covered different goods and a different classification from the conveyor chain on which credit was taken. The declaration for the actual goods was filed only after availment of credit and after the show-cause notice, so it could not cure the defect. The requirement of filing a specific declaration was treated as a substantive condition for availing Modvat credit, and non-compliance disentitled the assessee from the benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116189</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>