<?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 (9) TMI 297 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251271</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit was admissible on HR plates, sections and similar steel items used to fabricate storage tanks and other capital goods because eligibility depended on their use as components, spares or accessories in the factory and on satisfaction of the statutory definition under the Cenvat Credit Rules. Classification under Chapter 72 did not by itself defeat credit where the goods were employed in manufacture or fabrication of integral parts of capital goods. Relying on earlier authority, the court held that such items qualify for credit when used for fabrication of capital goods, and the substantial question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 12:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=364816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 297 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251271</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit was admissible on HR plates, sections and similar steel items used to fabricate storage tanks and other capital goods because eligibility depended on their use as components, spares or accessories in the factory and on satisfaction of the statutory definition under the Cenvat Credit Rules. Classification under Chapter 72 did not by itself defeat credit where the goods were employed in manufacture or fabrication of integral parts of capital goods. Relying on earlier authority, the court held that such items qualify for credit when used for fabrication of capital goods, and the substantial question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>