<?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 (3) TMI 1585 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197153</link>
    <description>Rectified spirit and ethyl alcohol were treated as the same commodity for tariff purposes, the former being purified ethyl alcohol used in the industrial process. As rectified spirit fell within Tariff Item No. 2207 20 00, its emergence as an intermediate product did not create a separate non-excisable commodity. The foundation for denying Cenvat credit on the ground that manufacture passed through a product outside the tariff therefore failed, and the show cause notice and credit demand were held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2017 18:04:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1585 - CESTAT  ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197153</link>
      <description>Rectified spirit and ethyl alcohol were treated as the same commodity for tariff purposes, the former being purified ethyl alcohol used in the industrial process. As rectified spirit fell within Tariff Item No. 2207 20 00, its emergence as an intermediate product did not create a separate non-excisable commodity. The foundation for denying Cenvat credit on the ground that manufacture passed through a product outside the tariff therefore failed, and the show cause notice and credit demand were held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197153</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>