<?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 (5) TMI 305 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327324</link>
    <description>Credit of duty paid on packing material was held admissible under the CENVAT Credit Rules because the definition of &quot;input&quot; is broad and covers goods used directly or indirectly in relation to manufacture, including packing material. The scheme is intended to avoid multiple incidence of tax on the final product, and the fact that the finished goods were cleared along with the packing material did not justify denial of credit. In the absence of any finding that the packing material had been recalled and reused, a refusal based only on invoice description was unsustainable. The assessee therefore succeeded on the question of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2016 16:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427447" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 305 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327324</link>
      <description>Credit of duty paid on packing material was held admissible under the CENVAT Credit Rules because the definition of &quot;input&quot; is broad and covers goods used directly or indirectly in relation to manufacture, including packing material. The scheme is intended to avoid multiple incidence of tax on the final product, and the fact that the finished goods were cleared along with the packing material did not justify denial of credit. In the absence of any finding that the packing material had been recalled and reused, a refusal based only on invoice description was unsustainable. The assessee therefore succeeded on the question of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>