<?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 (4) TMI 762 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126640</link>
    <description>Cut pieces of MS and HR sheets left after use in manufacture were not treated as clearance of inputs as such under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal held that remnants arising after the inputs had been used in production could not be equated with removal of the original inputs as such, so reversal of credit was not required. On that basis, the demand and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2012 12:09:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163532" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 762 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126640</link>
      <description>Cut pieces of MS and HR sheets left after use in manufacture were not treated as clearance of inputs as such under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Tribunal held that remnants arising after the inputs had been used in production could not be equated with removal of the original inputs as such, so reversal of credit was not required. On that basis, the demand and penalty were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>