<?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 (9) TMI 697 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237265</link>
    <description>Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 permits abatement for non-production during a continuous period of closure, and that entitlement is not confined to a full calendar month. Rule 7 only sets out monthly duty computation, while Rule 9 fixes monthly payment timing; neither provision excludes abatement for a fraction of a month. The 15-day continuous closure requirement relates to the assessee&#039;s obligation to intimate closure of machines, not to limit the substantive right to abatement. On that basis, abatement was available for the first five days of April 2011, and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2014 18:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 697 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237265</link>
      <description>Rule 10 of the Pan Masala Packing Machine (Capacity Determination and Collection of Duty) Rules, 2008 permits abatement for non-production during a continuous period of closure, and that entitlement is not confined to a full calendar month. Rule 7 only sets out monthly duty computation, while Rule 9 fixes monthly payment timing; neither provision excludes abatement for a fraction of a month. The 15-day continuous closure requirement relates to the assessee&#039;s obligation to intimate closure of machines, not to limit the substantive right to abatement. On that basis, abatement was available for the first five days of April 2011, and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237265</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>