<?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>2008 (5) TMI 202 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31560</link>
    <description>Steel plates and strips used to fabricate tanks for use within the factory qualified as inputs for Cenvat credit under Rule 2(k), even if they did not themselves meet the definition of capital goods. The decisive principle was that goods used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer, remain eligible as inputs. The exemption available to the fabricated tanks under Notification No. 67/95 did not defeat this credit entitlement, because the input definition protected such credit. The denial of Cenvat credit was therefore held unsustainable and the credit was admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 202 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31560</link>
      <description>Steel plates and strips used to fabricate tanks for use within the factory qualified as inputs for Cenvat credit under Rule 2(k), even if they did not themselves meet the definition of capital goods. The decisive principle was that goods used in the manufacture of capital goods, which are further used in the factory of the manufacturer, remain eligible as inputs. The exemption available to the fabricated tanks under Notification No. 67/95 did not defeat this credit entitlement, because the input definition protected such credit. The denial of Cenvat credit was therefore held unsustainable and the credit was admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>