<?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 5 - CESTAT, Chennai</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363</link>
    <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A remained available where doubled or multifolded yarn was not dutiable because its processing did not amount to manufacture. The Supreme Court&#039;s determination on non-manufacture removed the basis for Revenue&#039;s objection to credit granted by the first appellate authority. Consequently, the challenge to the proforma credit could not survive and was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 14:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39827" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 5 - CESTAT, Chennai</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363</link>
      <description>Proforma credit under Rule 56A remained available where doubled or multifolded yarn was not dutiable because its processing did not amount to manufacture. The Supreme Court&#039;s determination on non-manufacture removed the basis for Revenue&#039;s objection to credit granted by the first appellate authority. Consequently, the challenge to the proforma credit could not survive and was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>