<?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>2011 (5) TMI 223 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204848</link>
    <description>Reversal of CENVAT credit attributable to common inputs used in exempted goods before their clearance satisfies Rule 6 requirements; payment based on a percentage of exempted-goods value is not required where no credit relating to exempted production is retained. An alleged excess refund is unsustainable where excess credit reversal merely increases duty paid through the PLA, which is subsequently refundable, leaving no revenue loss. The demand is therefore unsustainable because the exercise is revenue neutral.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 08:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178376" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 223 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204848</link>
      <description>Reversal of CENVAT credit attributable to common inputs used in exempted goods before their clearance satisfies Rule 6 requirements; payment based on a percentage of exempted-goods value is not required where no credit relating to exempted production is retained. An alleged excess refund is unsustainable where excess credit reversal merely increases duty paid through the PLA, which is subsequently refundable, leaving no revenue loss. The demand is therefore unsustainable because the exercise is revenue neutral.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>