<?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 (7) TMI 444 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119273</link>
    <description>A prima facie view was taken that the amount paid on excisable inputs after the change from export production to domestic clearances constituted duty payable on the materials received, not a mere other amount, so credit was considered supportable on that basis. The cited precedent was found inapplicable on the facts. On that footing, the stay applications were allowed and recovery was stayed until disposal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:19:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156270" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 444 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119273</link>
      <description>A prima facie view was taken that the amount paid on excisable inputs after the change from export production to domestic clearances constituted duty payable on the materials received, not a mere other amount, so credit was considered supportable on that basis. The cited precedent was found inapplicable on the facts. On that footing, the stay applications were allowed and recovery was stayed until disposal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119273</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>