<?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 432 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122919</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on GI wires was held admissible for the period before 20-5-1988 because Notification No. 177/86 then allowed deemed credit without production of duty-paid documents, and the later restriction applied only from that date. The High Court remand was not confined to PVC compound alone, as all contentions had been kept open, so the GI wires issue remained open for decision. The authority below therefore erred in excluding that issue and in denying credit on the mistaken assumption that the remand was limited.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:00:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159899" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 432 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122919</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on GI wires was held admissible for the period before 20-5-1988 because Notification No. 177/86 then allowed deemed credit without production of duty-paid documents, and the later restriction applied only from that date. The High Court remand was not confined to PVC compound alone, as all contentions had been kept open, so the GI wires issue remained open for decision. The authority below therefore erred in excluding that issue and in denying credit on the mistaken assumption that the remand was limited.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>