<?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>2018 (6) TMI 916 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362089</link>
    <description>Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 does not impose reversal of Cenvat credit as a condition for remission of duty on goods destroyed by fire. Goods lost by accident are not treated as exempted goods, and the inputs used in their manufacture are regarded as having been put to intended use. A contrary view requiring credit reversal was held unsustainable, so the demand for reversal of Cenvat credit failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 10:27:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=524131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 916 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362089</link>
      <description>Rule 21 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 does not impose reversal of Cenvat credit as a condition for remission of duty on goods destroyed by fire. Goods lost by accident are not treated as exempted goods, and the inputs used in their manufacture are regarded as having been put to intended use. A contrary view requiring credit reversal was held unsustainable, so the demand for reversal of Cenvat credit failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>