<?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>1996 (10) TMI 498 - CEGAT- CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191630</link>
    <description>Transformers used in a manufacturing plant were treated as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q because the term &quot;plant&quot; was given its ordinary commercial meaning and read broadly to cover machines, equipment and allied apparatus installed for manufacture. On that construction, transformers that enabled the plant to function fell within the general definition even before the specific insertion of clause (d). The amendment inserting transformers of capacity exceeding 75 KVA was treated as clarificatory, intended to remove doubt rather than create a new entitlement, so the credit claim was upheld for the earlier period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:15:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (10) TMI 498 - CEGAT- CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191630</link>
      <description>Transformers used in a manufacturing plant were treated as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q because the term &quot;plant&quot; was given its ordinary commercial meaning and read broadly to cover machines, equipment and allied apparatus installed for manufacture. On that construction, transformers that enabled the plant to function fell within the general definition even before the specific insertion of clause (d). The amendment inserting transformers of capacity exceeding 75 KVA was treated as clarificatory, intended to remove doubt rather than create a new entitlement, so the credit claim was upheld for the earlier period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Oct 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>