<?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>2005 (1) TMI 724 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197090</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was allowed for diesel generating sets and related goods used in the factory where the claim was fully disclosed in declarations and RT-12 returns, and earlier decisions on the same class of goods were followed. The demand and allied proceedings were held time-barred because the record disclosed no fraud, suppression, or other basis for invoking the extended limitation period. Proceedings under section 11D were also found unsustainable against the supplier, as the duty had been passed on through invoices and no retained duty amount was shown. The departmental proceedings were therefore dropped and the Revenue appeals failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Dec 2017 11:59:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501258" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 724 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197090</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was allowed for diesel generating sets and related goods used in the factory where the claim was fully disclosed in declarations and RT-12 returns, and earlier decisions on the same class of goods were followed. The demand and allied proceedings were held time-barred because the record disclosed no fraud, suppression, or other basis for invoking the extended limitation period. Proceedings under section 11D were also found unsustainable against the supplier, as the duty had been passed on through invoices and no retained duty amount was shown. The departmental proceedings were therefore dropped and the Revenue appeals failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>