<?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>2005 (11) TMI 473 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172744</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was admissible where the disputed products had in fact suffered duty and the credit claimed related to duty actually paid. The dispute over classification was not required to be examined for disposal because the situation was revenue neutral and caused no revenue loss. On that basis, denial of credit, together with consequential interest and penalty, was not sustained, and the appellant was held entitled to the Modvat credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Aug 2015 12:55:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395143" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 473 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172744</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was admissible where the disputed products had in fact suffered duty and the credit claimed related to duty actually paid. The dispute over classification was not required to be examined for disposal because the situation was revenue neutral and caused no revenue loss. On that basis, denial of credit, together with consequential interest and penalty, was not sustained, and the appellant was held entitled to the Modvat credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172744</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>