<?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>2016 (6) TMI 1461 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307159</link>
    <description>The appeal concerned whether Modvat credit on capital goods could be denied when electricity generated using those goods was partly sold outside the factory, in light of the second proviso to Rule 57R(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Department withdrew the appeal on instructions, and the Madras HC dismissed it as withdrawn, leaving the substantial question of law open. No determination was made on the merits of the credit entitlement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2023 08:29:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=708468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 1461 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307159</link>
      <description>The appeal concerned whether Modvat credit on capital goods could be denied when electricity generated using those goods was partly sold outside the factory, in light of the second proviso to Rule 57R(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Department withdrew the appeal on instructions, and the Madras HC dismissed it as withdrawn, leaving the substantial question of law open. No determination was made on the merits of the credit entitlement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307159</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>