<?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 (12) TMI 675 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241010</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the appellant, a manufacturer of industrial valves, to pre-deposit Rs.15 lakhs for admission of the appeal regarding the reversal of CENVAT credit on goods supplied to 100% EOUs. Compliance was mandated within six weeks, with a stay on the collection of the remaining adjudged dues pending the pre-deposit. The matter was scheduled for a compliance report on a specified date. The appellant&#039;s arguments regarding manufacturing activities on procured spares and the application of Notification No.6/2006 for exemption on goods supplied against International Competitive Bidding were considered alongside relevant precedents, leading to this decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Dec 2013 10:32:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=339388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 675 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241010</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the appellant, a manufacturer of industrial valves, to pre-deposit Rs.15 lakhs for admission of the appeal regarding the reversal of CENVAT credit on goods supplied to 100% EOUs. Compliance was mandated within six weeks, with a stay on the collection of the remaining adjudged dues pending the pre-deposit. The matter was scheduled for a compliance report on a specified date. The appellant&#039;s arguments regarding manufacturing activities on procured spares and the application of Notification No.6/2006 for exemption on goods supplied against International Competitive Bidding were considered alongside relevant precedents, leading to this decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>