<?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 384 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33322</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit was admissible on M.S. angles, plates, channels, rods, beams, HR coils and aluminium coils when used in fabrication of sugar manufacturing equipment and functional supporting structures, because such items formed part of the machinery or its integral support rather than mere construction material. The items identified included equipment and structures for the juice clarifier, bagasse handling system, tanks, elevators, hoppers, cane carrier, boiler, bagasse carrier and power house panel board structure, and the view was supported by earlier precedent in the assessee&#039;s own case and other cited decisions. Credit relating to items used for construction of the factory shed was not in dispute and remained outside the contested claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71955" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 384 - CESTAT Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33322</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit was admissible on M.S. angles, plates, channels, rods, beams, HR coils and aluminium coils when used in fabrication of sugar manufacturing equipment and functional supporting structures, because such items formed part of the machinery or its integral support rather than mere construction material. The items identified included equipment and structures for the juice clarifier, bagasse handling system, tanks, elevators, hoppers, cane carrier, boiler, bagasse carrier and power house panel board structure, and the view was supported by earlier precedent in the assessee&#039;s own case and other cited decisions. Credit relating to items used for construction of the factory shed was not in dispute and remained outside the contested claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>