<?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 (2) TMI 575 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206819</link>
    <description>Retrospective insertion of Rule 57CCC changed the treatment of common inputs used in manufacturing dutiable and nil-rated goods by providing a mechanism to reverse actual credit attributable to exempted or nil-rated final products. On the facts described, the petitioners had already reversed proportionate credit on the common input, and the matter was required to be assessed under the amended statutory scheme. The adjudicating authority was directed to reconsider the credit liability after giving due opportunity and examining the required certificate and supporting evidence. The existing demand under Rule 57CC was set aside and the issue of attributable credit was remanded for fresh determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2011 07:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180302" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 575 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206819</link>
      <description>Retrospective insertion of Rule 57CCC changed the treatment of common inputs used in manufacturing dutiable and nil-rated goods by providing a mechanism to reverse actual credit attributable to exempted or nil-rated final products. On the facts described, the petitioners had already reversed proportionate credit on the common input, and the matter was required to be assessed under the amended statutory scheme. The adjudicating authority was directed to reconsider the credit liability after giving due opportunity and examining the required certificate and supporting evidence. The existing demand under Rule 57CC was set aside and the issue of attributable credit was remanded for fresh determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>