<?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>2010 (5) TMI 743 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155565</link>
    <description>Floor sweepings from biscuit manufacture, consisting of flour, dirty dough and similar waste, were treated as non-excisable rubbish rather than exempted goods, so Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules and Rule 57AD of the Central Excise Rules did not apply. Even if such waste were regarded as nil-rated excisable goods, the separate-account requirement could not be enforced where inputs were used only for dutiable final products and the waste arose incidentally, because compliance would be impossible. On that basis, the demand of 8% of the clearance value was held unsustainable and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2013 14:55:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=172596" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 743 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155565</link>
      <description>Floor sweepings from biscuit manufacture, consisting of flour, dirty dough and similar waste, were treated as non-excisable rubbish rather than exempted goods, so Rule 6 of the Cenvat Credit Rules and Rule 57AD of the Central Excise Rules did not apply. Even if such waste were regarded as nil-rated excisable goods, the separate-account requirement could not be enforced where inputs were used only for dutiable final products and the waste arose incidentally, because compliance would be impossible. On that basis, the demand of 8% of the clearance value was held unsustainable and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155565</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>