<?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>1983 (5) TMI 244 - CEGAT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166160</link>
    <description>Auxiliary excise duty paid on an optical bleaching agent could be taken as proforma credit under Rule 56A and utilised to discharge basic excise duty on the finished product, because auxiliary duty is itself a duty of excise and its character does not bar set-off against duty on finished excisable goods. The later amendment by Notification No. 4/78 clarified this position by expressly allowing credit for payment of duty on any finished excisable goods. The exemption notification covering the input did not defeat the credit claim, as the input was not cleared under that notification for the purpose of the credit issue. The credit was therefore available for use against the finished product.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 07 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 14:27:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1983 (5) TMI 244 - CEGAT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166160</link>
      <description>Auxiliary excise duty paid on an optical bleaching agent could be taken as proforma credit under Rule 56A and utilised to discharge basic excise duty on the finished product, because auxiliary duty is itself a duty of excise and its character does not bar set-off against duty on finished excisable goods. The later amendment by Notification No. 4/78 clarified this position by expressly allowing credit for payment of duty on any finished excisable goods. The exemption notification covering the input did not defeat the credit claim, as the input was not cleared under that notification for the purpose of the credit issue. The credit was therefore available for use against the finished product.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 07 May 1983 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>