<?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>2015 (2) TMI 701 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256701</link>
    <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57A was allowable once duty-paid inputs were brought into the factory and used in or in relation to manufacture; actual emergence of finished goods was not a condition precedent. Because the inputs had already entered the manufacturing process, destruction of the goods in a fire did not by itself render the credit inadmissible. The denial of credit and the connected penalty were therefore not sustainable, and the assessee succeeded on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 10:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=376405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 701 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256701</link>
      <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57A was allowable once duty-paid inputs were brought into the factory and used in or in relation to manufacture; actual emergence of finished goods was not a condition precedent. Because the inputs had already entered the manufacturing process, destruction of the goods in a fire did not by itself render the credit inadmissible. The denial of credit and the connected penalty were therefore not sustainable, and the assessee succeeded on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256701</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>