<?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 (2) TMI 369 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32614</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, affirming their entitlement to modvat credit on captive consumption of inputs under Notification No. 58/97 CE. It emphasized substantive compliance over procedural formalities, rejecting the requirement for separate manufacturing units and highlighting the purpose of preventing double taxation on goods. The judgment clarified that denial of credit based on ownership or location would be unjust, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee in the dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71253" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 369 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32614</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s decision in favor of the assessee, affirming their entitlement to modvat credit on captive consumption of inputs under Notification No. 58/97 CE. It emphasized substantive compliance over procedural formalities, rejecting the requirement for separate manufacturing units and highlighting the purpose of preventing double taxation on goods. The judgment clarified that denial of credit based on ownership or location would be unjust, ultimately ruling in favor of the assessee in the dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>