<?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 (7) TMI 1046 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128146</link>
    <description>Welding electrodes used only for maintenance and repair of machinery did not qualify as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q, so credit was denied on that item. Penalty was unwarranted because the eligibility issue was debatable and supported by conflicting judicial views, so penalty was deleted. Credit on foundation bolts was admissible because earlier Tribunal precedent had already settled that position in favour of the assessee, and the allowance was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165017" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 1046 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128146</link>
      <description>Welding electrodes used only for maintenance and repair of machinery did not qualify as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q, so credit was denied on that item. Penalty was unwarranted because the eligibility issue was debatable and supported by conflicting judicial views, so penalty was deleted. Credit on foundation bolts was admissible because earlier Tribunal precedent had already settled that position in favour of the assessee, and the allowance was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=128146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>