<?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>2007 (3) TMI 531 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121380</link>
    <description>Credit under Notification No. 29/2000-C.E. (N.T.) could not be claimed after the notification&#039;s expressly stated validity period of 1-4-2000 to 30-4-2000. Because the credit was taken after April 2000, the benefit could not be extended beyond the period for which the notification operated, and denial of credit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2012 12:53:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158374" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 531 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121380</link>
      <description>Credit under Notification No. 29/2000-C.E. (N.T.) could not be claimed after the notification&#039;s expressly stated validity period of 1-4-2000 to 30-4-2000. Because the credit was taken after April 2000, the benefit could not be extended beyond the period for which the notification operated, and denial of credit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121380</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>