<?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>2023 (8) TMI 1140 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442161</link>
    <description>Amendments to Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules clarified options where common inputs and input services are used for both dutiable and exempted goods: maintain separate accounts for such inputs, reverse proportionate Cenvat credit following prescribed apportionment procedure, or reverse a fixed percentage of value for exempted goods. The 2010 retrospective amendment enabled adjustment even where separate accounts were not maintained, permitting reversal of proportionate credit or payment of the fixed-rate alternative for relevant pre-2010 periods. The respondent had reversed proportionate credit for periods from April 2008 onwards and the dispute for earlier periods was covered by the retrospective amendment; the appeal was dismissed and decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2026 14:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=723734" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 1140 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442161</link>
      <description>Amendments to Rule 6 of the CENVAT Credit Rules clarified options where common inputs and input services are used for both dutiable and exempted goods: maintain separate accounts for such inputs, reverse proportionate Cenvat credit following prescribed apportionment procedure, or reverse a fixed percentage of value for exempted goods. The 2010 retrospective amendment enabled adjustment even where separate accounts were not maintained, permitting reversal of proportionate credit or payment of the fixed-rate alternative for relevant pre-2010 periods. The respondent had reversed proportionate credit for periods from April 2008 onwards and the dispute for earlier periods was covered by the retrospective amendment; the appeal was dismissed and decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442161</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>