<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1107 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347049</link>
    <description>Capital goods credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 could not be claimed for the subsequent year where the permissible first-year credit had already been taken and one machine had been transferred out of the factory. The Tribunal found that the correct course after transfer was to reverse the credit relating to the transferred machine and allow credit at the receiving unit, not to retain the balance in the original unit. It held that decisions cited by the appellant concerned a different situation where less than 50% credit had been availed in the first year, and that the amended provision could not be applied retrospectively. The balance credit was therefore inadmissible, and the demand and penalty were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1107 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347049</link>
      <description>Capital goods credit under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2001 could not be claimed for the subsequent year where the permissible first-year credit had already been taken and one machine had been transferred out of the factory. The Tribunal found that the correct course after transfer was to reverse the credit relating to the transferred machine and allow credit at the receiving unit, not to retain the balance in the original unit. It held that decisions cited by the appellant concerned a different situation where less than 50% credit had been availed in the first year, and that the amended provision could not be applied retrospectively. The balance credit was therefore inadmissible, and the demand and penalty were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>