<?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>2006 (10) TMI 40 -  CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1059</link>
    <description>Bricks, refractory materials and jointing cement used to fabricate a furnace within the factory qualified as inputs for Modvat credit under Rule 57-AA because goods used in the manufacture of capital goods further used in the factory were expressly covered by the rule&#039;s Explanation 2. The fact that the materials could also answer the description of capital goods did not by itself exclude credit where they were collectively consumed to bring the furnace into existence and the declaration showed factory use in or in relation to manufacture of the final dutiable product. Credit was therefore admissible and denial of Modvat credit and penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 05:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40474" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (10) TMI 40 -  CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1059</link>
      <description>Bricks, refractory materials and jointing cement used to fabricate a furnace within the factory qualified as inputs for Modvat credit under Rule 57-AA because goods used in the manufacture of capital goods further used in the factory were expressly covered by the rule&#039;s Explanation 2. The fact that the materials could also answer the description of capital goods did not by itself exclude credit where they were collectively consumed to bring the furnace into existence and the declaration showed factory use in or in relation to manufacture of the final dutiable product. Credit was therefore admissible and denial of Modvat credit and penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>