<?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>1999 (5) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281319</link>
    <description>An assessee may choose not to avail an exemption notification under Section 5A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and pay duty so that Modvat credit on input duty remains available; where the classification list was approved and RT-12 returns were accepted, credit could not be denied merely because exemption was available. The extended period of limitation was also not justified on these facts, since the department had accepted the relevant returns and classification without objection. Section 11AC could not be applied retrospectively to a 1992-93 dispute because it was introduced later. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2019 18:29:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=575113" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (5) TMI 625 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281319</link>
      <description>An assessee may choose not to avail an exemption notification under Section 5A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and pay duty so that Modvat credit on input duty remains available; where the classification list was approved and RT-12 returns were accepted, credit could not be denied merely because exemption was available. The extended period of limitation was also not justified on these facts, since the department had accepted the relevant returns and classification without objection. Section 11AC could not be applied retrospectively to a 1992-93 dispute because it was introduced later. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 May 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281319</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>