<?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>2007 (10) TMI 607 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170722</link>
    <description>An exemption conditioned on non-availment of Cenvat credit turns on whether credit on the inputs used in manufacture was actually taken; on that test, nylon twine qualified for exemption under Notification No. 30/2004 because no credit was taken on the yarn inputs. For the earlier period, exemption under Notification No. 6/2002 was unavailable because the relevant condition required duty-paid inputs and the input yarn was exempted from duty. The discussion also notes that the demand for that earlier period could not be sustained through the extended limitation period because suppression of material facts was not established, making the duty demands and penalties unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2015 15:58:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 607 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170722</link>
      <description>An exemption conditioned on non-availment of Cenvat credit turns on whether credit on the inputs used in manufacture was actually taken; on that test, nylon twine qualified for exemption under Notification No. 30/2004 because no credit was taken on the yarn inputs. For the earlier period, exemption under Notification No. 6/2002 was unavailable because the relevant condition required duty-paid inputs and the input yarn was exempted from duty. The discussion also notes that the demand for that earlier period could not be sustained through the extended limitation period because suppression of material facts was not established, making the duty demands and penalties unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170722</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>