<?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>1980 (12) TMI 188 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165767</link>
    <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be denied merely because the L-4 licence was issued a few days after receipt of the consignment, where the licence had been applied for in advance and the delay was attributable to the department. On those facts, the delay in grant of the licence was liable to be condoned for extending the Rule 56A benefit, and the petitioners were entitled to the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2014 15:55:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=361883" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (12) TMI 188 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165767</link>
      <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 could not be denied merely because the L-4 licence was issued a few days after receipt of the consignment, where the licence had been applied for in advance and the delay was attributable to the department. On those facts, the delay in grant of the licence was liable to be condoned for extending the Rule 56A benefit, and the petitioners were entitled to the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>