<?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>Dispute on CENVAT Credit Reversal: Rule 3(5) vs. 3(5)(A) CCR 2004 for Scrap from Old Capital Goods.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39518</link>
    <description>Reversal of CENVAT credit - removal of scrap generated and old capital goods - whether the appellant is required to pay duty by way of reversal under Rule 3(5) or 3(5)(A) of CCR, 2004 on removal of the scrap generated from used and old capital goods? - the show cause notice is presumptive and hence not maintainable. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 08:20:57 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 08:20:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521190" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Dispute on CENVAT Credit Reversal: Rule 3(5) vs. 3(5)(A) CCR 2004 for Scrap from Old Capital Goods.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39518</link>
      <description>Reversal of CENVAT credit - removal of scrap generated and old capital goods - whether the appellant is required to pay duty by way of reversal under Rule 3(5) or 3(5)(A) of CCR, 2004 on removal of the scrap generated from used and old capital goods? - the show cause notice is presumptive and hence not maintainable. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2018 08:20:57 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=39518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>