<?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>2009 (1) TMI 569 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124882</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on capital goods was examined under the rule permitting only one benefit for the same asset: either depreciation under income-tax law or excise-based credit. Reversal of a previously claimed depreciation deduction did not by itself establish entitlement to Cenvat credit, absent a prima facie legal basis. Consequently, waiver of pre-deposit was declined, and the appeal could proceed only after compliance with the directed pre-deposit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2012 17:13:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161820" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 569 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124882</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on capital goods was examined under the rule permitting only one benefit for the same asset: either depreciation under income-tax law or excise-based credit. Reversal of a previously claimed depreciation deduction did not by itself establish entitlement to Cenvat credit, absent a prima facie legal basis. Consequently, waiver of pre-deposit was declined, and the appeal could proceed only after compliance with the directed pre-deposit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124882</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>