<?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>2000 (10) TMI 981 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299424</link>
    <description>The case involved issues regarding the availability of Modvat Credit on inputs used in manufacturing final products cleared without duty payment under Chapter X, the invocation of a longer period of limitation for demands raised beyond six months from the relevant date, interpretation of statutory documents like C/List and RT-12 returns, application of Tribunal judgments on Modvat Credit availability and limitation period, and double demands for the same goods and period. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the demands were barred by limitation based on relevant dates for taking credit and settled law, ultimately allowing the appeals with consequential reliefs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2021 12:08:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 981 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299424</link>
      <description>The case involved issues regarding the availability of Modvat Credit on inputs used in manufacturing final products cleared without duty payment under Chapter X, the invocation of a longer period of limitation for demands raised beyond six months from the relevant date, interpretation of statutory documents like C/List and RT-12 returns, application of Tribunal judgments on Modvat Credit availability and limitation period, and double demands for the same goods and period. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that the demands were barred by limitation based on relevant dates for taking credit and settled law, ultimately allowing the appeals with consequential reliefs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299424</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>