<?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 (9) TMI 491 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117114</link>
    <description>Deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. (N.T.) was available on gray fabrics received for processing because the notification expressly allowed credit on declared inputs at the specified rate notwithstanding the actual duty paid on those inputs. The text contained no condition that the gray fabrics must be manufactured from duty-paid yarn, and such a restriction could not be implied by reference to legislative intent. As the actual duty discharged on the underlying inputs was not the controlling factor, denial of deemed credit on the ground that the yarn was not duty paid was not sustainable, and the assessee&#039;s entitlement was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 14:29:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154112" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 491 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117114</link>
      <description>Deemed credit under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. (N.T.) was available on gray fabrics received for processing because the notification expressly allowed credit on declared inputs at the specified rate notwithstanding the actual duty paid on those inputs. The text contained no condition that the gray fabrics must be manufactured from duty-paid yarn, and such a restriction could not be implied by reference to legislative intent. As the actual duty discharged on the underlying inputs was not the controlling factor, denial of deemed credit on the ground that the yarn was not duty paid was not sustainable, and the assessee&#039;s entitlement was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117114</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>