<?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>2016 (1) TMI 431 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270639</link>
    <description>Delay in filing the declaration for MODVAT credit on capital goods under Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 did not by itself defeat the credit claim where receipt of the goods and their duty-paid character were undisputed. Applying the amended Rule 57T scheme, the Tribunal treated the declaration lapse as a procedural defect subordinate to the substantive eligibility conditions and allowed credit where delay was the sole objection. Where the show-cause notice also raised additional grounds that had not been examined by the appellate authority, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on those remaining issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 00:48:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412785" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (1) TMI 431 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270639</link>
      <description>Delay in filing the declaration for MODVAT credit on capital goods under Rule 57T of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 did not by itself defeat the credit claim where receipt of the goods and their duty-paid character were undisputed. Applying the amended Rule 57T scheme, the Tribunal treated the declaration lapse as a procedural defect subordinate to the substantive eligibility conditions and allowed credit where delay was the sole objection. Where the show-cause notice also raised additional grounds that had not been examined by the appellate authority, the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on those remaining issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>