<?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 433 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122920</link>
    <description>Man-made grey fabrics were treated as &quot;inputs&quot; for Cenvat credit purposes because the concept of input is relative to the stage of use and the person handling the goods. Although grey fabrics were a finished product for the manufacturer, they remained inputs for the processor using them for further processing, and their character was not changed by passing through an intermediary registered dealer. The credit scheme was understood to apply to stock held by traders as well as processors, so the departmental objection based on the dealer&#039;s intermediary role was rejected. On that basis, the credit claimed was allowed and the denial of credit was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:01:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (12) TMI 433 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122920</link>
      <description>Man-made grey fabrics were treated as &quot;inputs&quot; for Cenvat credit purposes because the concept of input is relative to the stage of use and the person handling the goods. Although grey fabrics were a finished product for the manufacturer, they remained inputs for the processor using them for further processing, and their character was not changed by passing through an intermediary registered dealer. The credit scheme was understood to apply to stock held by traders as well as processors, so the departmental objection based on the dealer&#039;s intermediary role was rejected. On that basis, the credit claimed was allowed and the denial of credit was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>