<?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 (11) TMI 349 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334331</link>
    <description>Recredit of Modvat credit reversed when iron ore fines were sent to a job worker was held permissible because the assessee followed the prescribed job work procedure under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The processed pellets were received back and had been cleared on payment of duty by the job worker, and the assessee did not separately take credit of that duty. On those facts, the reversed amount could validly be recredited, and the impugned order was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447302" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 349 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334331</link>
      <description>Recredit of Modvat credit reversed when iron ore fines were sent to a job worker was held permissible because the assessee followed the prescribed job work procedure under Rule 57F(4) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The processed pellets were received back and had been cleared on payment of duty by the job worker, and the assessee did not separately take credit of that duty. On those facts, the reversed amount could validly be recredited, and the impugned order was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>