<?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 (12) TMI 515 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120847</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on repaired materials even though the supplier had paid duty on exempted goods, because prior Tribunal precedent had already settled the entitlement and the Board circulars relied on by the Department had been considered in that line of authority. The order allowing credit was found to disclose no irregularity or illegality, and the departmental challenge therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 18:04:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 515 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120847</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was held admissible on repaired materials even though the supplier had paid duty on exempted goods, because prior Tribunal precedent had already settled the entitlement and the Board circulars relied on by the Department had been considered in that line of authority. The order allowing credit was found to disclose no irregularity or illegality, and the departmental challenge therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>