<?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 (7) TMI 545 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123610</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on duty-paid capital goods could not be denied merely because it was taken before installation or before filing the declaration, where the relevant period was prior to 1-1-1996 and the prohibition against pre-installation availment was not yet in force. The goods were received in the factory, ultimately used in manufacture of dutiable final products, and the credit was utilised only after installation. The failure to file the declaration before receipt was treated as a minor procedural infraction, not a ground to defeat substantive entitlement. Accordingly, denial of credit was unjustified and the assessee was entitled to avail it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 13:42:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 545 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123610</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on duty-paid capital goods could not be denied merely because it was taken before installation or before filing the declaration, where the relevant period was prior to 1-1-1996 and the prohibition against pre-installation availment was not yet in force. The goods were received in the factory, ultimately used in manufacture of dutiable final products, and the credit was utilised only after installation. The failure to file the declaration before receipt was treated as a minor procedural infraction, not a ground to defeat substantive entitlement. Accordingly, denial of credit was unjustified and the assessee was entitled to avail it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123610</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>