<?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 (5) TMI 730 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126392</link>
    <description>The Tribunal overturned the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision to deny Modvat credit and impose a penalty on M/s. Johnson Lifts Pvt. Ltd. The denial was found unjustified as the inputs met the required conditions, and there was no evidence of non-compliance with credit-taking timelines. The Tribunal also ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the interpretation of Notification No. 21/2000-C.E. (N.T.) on deemed credit for re-rolled products, emphasizing that the availability of credit was not restricted by the timeline. Additionally, the Tribunal held that the denial of credit and penalty imposition based on the circular on Cenvat credit lacked merit, leading to the appeal being allowed and the impugned order set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2012 11:41:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163286" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 730 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126392</link>
      <description>The Tribunal overturned the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s decision to deny Modvat credit and impose a penalty on M/s. Johnson Lifts Pvt. Ltd. The denial was found unjustified as the inputs met the required conditions, and there was no evidence of non-compliance with credit-taking timelines. The Tribunal also ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the interpretation of Notification No. 21/2000-C.E. (N.T.) on deemed credit for re-rolled products, emphasizing that the availability of credit was not restricted by the timeline. Additionally, the Tribunal held that the denial of credit and penalty imposition based on the circular on Cenvat credit lacked merit, leading to the appeal being allowed and the impugned order set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126392</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>