<?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 (8) TMI 109 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31964</link>
    <description>Non-consideration of a binding Supreme Court decision on MODVAT credit for lubricants used in mining machinery constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The larger-bench view applied was that omission to follow an operative Apex Court ruling at final disposal renders the order per incuriam and amenable to recall. On that basis, the earlier final order was recalled, the recall application was allowed to that extent, and the matter was reopened for fresh disposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70609" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 109 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31964</link>
      <description>Non-consideration of a binding Supreme Court decision on MODVAT credit for lubricants used in mining machinery constituted an error apparent on the face of the record. The larger-bench view applied was that omission to follow an operative Apex Court ruling at final disposal renders the order per incuriam and amenable to recall. On that basis, the earlier final order was recalled, the recall application was allowed to that extent, and the matter was reopened for fresh disposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>