<?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 (3) TMI 516 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206023</link>
    <description>Where captively consumed diesel oil engines were treated as exempt under Notification No. 4/97, the 8% amount debited under Rule 57CC could not be refunded in isolation. The Tribunal held that the refund had to be examined after adjusting the duty attributable to the captively used engines, because the assessee had not paid duty on those engines while making the debit on the final product. Only any excess amount, if established, would be refundable. On that basis, the refund claim as made was not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2011 00:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179522" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 516 - CESTAT, AHEMDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206023</link>
      <description>Where captively consumed diesel oil engines were treated as exempt under Notification No. 4/97, the 8% amount debited under Rule 57CC could not be refunded in isolation. The Tribunal held that the refund had to be examined after adjusting the duty attributable to the captively used engines, because the assessee had not paid duty on those engines while making the debit on the final product. Only any excess amount, if established, would be refundable. On that basis, the refund claim as made was not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206023</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>