<?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 (8) TMI 496 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116517</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods sent to a job worker could not be denied merely because the goods were received back after a long interval, where duty had been paid through TR 6 challan and credit was taken shortly thereafter. Rule 57S was treated as making the date of duty payment the relevant date for eligibility, and earlier Tribunal rulings accepting TR 6 challan payment were followed. A contrary precedent was distinguished because it arose on different facts and did not apply where duty had in fact been paid before the credit claim. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jun 2012 12:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 496 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116517</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods sent to a job worker could not be denied merely because the goods were received back after a long interval, where duty had been paid through TR 6 challan and credit was taken shortly thereafter. Rule 57S was treated as making the date of duty payment the relevant date for eligibility, and earlier Tribunal rulings accepting TR 6 challan payment were followed. A contrary precedent was distinguished because it arose on different facts and did not apply where duty had in fact been paid before the credit claim. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116517</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>