<?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>2006 (1) TMI 375 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117369</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi allowed the appeals and set aside the Commissioner&#039;s decision, which restricted the utilization of MODVAT credit for specific final products. The Tribunal held that the Cenvat Credit Rules permitted the unrestricted use of credit for any final product, emphasizing the credit&#039;s indefeasibility. It rejected the fragmentation of the MODVAT credit account based on different production lines and raw materials. The appellants were granted relief as the Commissioner&#039;s interpretation contradicted the rules, a Supreme Court judgment, and Board instructions, affirming the appellants&#039; right to utilize the credit for various final products.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:06:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154366" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 375 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117369</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi allowed the appeals and set aside the Commissioner&#039;s decision, which restricted the utilization of MODVAT credit for specific final products. The Tribunal held that the Cenvat Credit Rules permitted the unrestricted use of credit for any final product, emphasizing the credit&#039;s indefeasibility. It rejected the fragmentation of the MODVAT credit account based on different production lines and raw materials. The appellants were granted relief as the Commissioner&#039;s interpretation contradicted the rules, a Supreme Court judgment, and Board instructions, affirming the appellants&#039; right to utilize the credit for various final products.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117369</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>