<?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>2019 (4) TMI 1682 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379238</link>
    <description>Remission of duty was allowed for finished and capital goods destroyed in fire because the loss was otherwise established, and delayed intimation to the excise authorities was treated as a procedural lapse that did not defeat substantive relief. Reversal of MODVAT credit was also held unnecessary where the goods and capital goods had been destroyed and were incapable of use in manufacture. The adverse order was set aside, granting relief on both remission and credit reversal issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 10:14:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568927" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1682 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379238</link>
      <description>Remission of duty was allowed for finished and capital goods destroyed in fire because the loss was otherwise established, and delayed intimation to the excise authorities was treated as a procedural lapse that did not defeat substantive relief. Reversal of MODVAT credit was also held unnecessary where the goods and capital goods had been destroyed and were incapable of use in manufacture. The adverse order was set aside, granting relief on both remission and credit reversal issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379238</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>