<?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 (11) TMI 848 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239671</link>
    <description>Deemed Modvat credit remained available to re-rollers covered by Notification No. 1/93-CE even after clearances crossed the Rs. 75 lakh limit, because the exemption scheme continued to apply to units within the class covered by the notification. The quantum limit did not by itself terminate entitlement to the exemption, and an executive trade notice could not narrow the benefit granted by the deemed credit order. On that basis, denial of deemed credit was treated as unsustainable and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 848 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239671</link>
      <description>Deemed Modvat credit remained available to re-rollers covered by Notification No. 1/93-CE even after clearances crossed the Rs. 75 lakh limit, because the exemption scheme continued to apply to units within the class covered by the notification. The quantum limit did not by itself terminate entitlement to the exemption, and an executive trade notice could not narrow the benefit granted by the deemed credit order. On that basis, denial of deemed credit was treated as unsustainable and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239671</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>