<?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>2013 (2) TMI 251 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220846</link>
    <description>Modvat Credit was unavailable where the assessee&#039;s own declaration described the goods as special boiling point spirits under the relevant tariff headings, and those headings were expressly excluded from the Modvat notification during the material period; the claim could not be sustained on an unsubstantiated different description such as benzene or toluene, so denial of credit was upheld. Penalty was also sustained because the show cause notice set out the material facts and the charge was sufficiently clear, and the omission to mention the exact clause of Rule 173Q caused no prejudice and did not offend natural justice. The challenge to both the credit denial and the penalty therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 251 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220846</link>
      <description>Modvat Credit was unavailable where the assessee&#039;s own declaration described the goods as special boiling point spirits under the relevant tariff headings, and those headings were expressly excluded from the Modvat notification during the material period; the claim could not be sustained on an unsubstantiated different description such as benzene or toluene, so denial of credit was upheld. Penalty was also sustained because the show cause notice set out the material facts and the charge was sufficiently clear, and the omission to mention the exact clause of Rule 173Q caused no prejudice and did not offend natural justice. The challenge to both the credit denial and the penalty therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220846</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>