<?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 (12) TMI 338 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120705</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that manufacturers were not eligible for Cenvat credit on scrapped goods as no manufacturing process was conducted on such goods. Despite the appellants&#039; claim of repairing and returning defective goods to customers after payment of duty, lack of evidence led to the denial of credit. The Tribunal affirmed the excise duty demand and penalty imposed under the Central Excise Act, dismissing the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2012 16:44:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157700" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 338 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120705</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that manufacturers were not eligible for Cenvat credit on scrapped goods as no manufacturing process was conducted on such goods. Despite the appellants&#039; claim of repairing and returning defective goods to customers after payment of duty, lack of evidence led to the denial of credit. The Tribunal affirmed the excise duty demand and penalty imposed under the Central Excise Act, dismissing the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>