<?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>2014 (8) TMI 85 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250135</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit on moulds and dies sent to a vendor could not be conclusively denied without examining whether the same goods were also used in the assessee&#039;s own factory. The vendor was treated as not being a job-worker because it sourced its own raw materials rather than receiving them from the principal manufacturer. Although there was no specific pre-27.02.2010 provision permitting removal of moulds and dies to such a vendor, the record did not show consideration of the assessee&#039;s alternate use claim. If that use was established, denial of credit would not automatically follow and any lapse would be only procedural, requiring de novo adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2015 14:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361232" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 85 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250135</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit on moulds and dies sent to a vendor could not be conclusively denied without examining whether the same goods were also used in the assessee&#039;s own factory. The vendor was treated as not being a job-worker because it sourced its own raw materials rather than receiving them from the principal manufacturer. Although there was no specific pre-27.02.2010 provision permitting removal of moulds and dies to such a vendor, the record did not show consideration of the assessee&#039;s alternate use claim. If that use was established, denial of credit would not automatically follow and any lapse would be only procedural, requiring de novo adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250135</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>