<?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 (5) TMI 478 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121883</link>
    <description>Rule 3(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 permits reversal or payment of an amount equal only to the credit originally taken on inputs removed as such or after partial processing. On removal of sheet metal parts after partial processing and E.D. coating, the operative question was whether duty could be demanded on the processed value or whether only the input credit had to be reversed. The provision was applied to the Cenvat scheme itself, not as a case of manufacture of a new product. As no credit had been taken on the coating materials, reversal of the credit on the inputs alone satisfied the rule, and the earlier view was treated as inapplicable after amendment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 18:43:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158875" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 478 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121883</link>
      <description>Rule 3(3)(b) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 permits reversal or payment of an amount equal only to the credit originally taken on inputs removed as such or after partial processing. On removal of sheet metal parts after partial processing and E.D. coating, the operative question was whether duty could be demanded on the processed value or whether only the input credit had to be reversed. The provision was applied to the Cenvat scheme itself, not as a case of manufacture of a new product. As no credit had been taken on the coating materials, reversal of the credit on the inputs alone satisfied the rule, and the earlier view was treated as inapplicable after amendment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121883</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>