<?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 (8) TMI 1582 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366110</link>
    <description>MODVAT credit was denied on seven appliances and instruments used in workshops and for maintenance of plant and machinery, because they were not employed in the manufacturing process itself. The factual finding that the items served only repair and maintenance functions was upheld, and the cited precedents supported the view that such tools do not qualify as capital goods for credit. Accordingly, the denial of MODVAT credit was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Aug 2018 06:24:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=532427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1582 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366110</link>
      <description>MODVAT credit was denied on seven appliances and instruments used in workshops and for maintenance of plant and machinery, because they were not employed in the manufacturing process itself. The factual finding that the items served only repair and maintenance functions was upheld, and the cited precedents supported the view that such tools do not qualify as capital goods for credit. Accordingly, the denial of MODVAT credit was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366110</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>