<?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>2004 (3) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47419</link>
    <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) was held unavailable on unserviceable railway material that admittedly had not suffered duty; the eligibility turned on the factual finding that the inputs were non-duty paid, and the assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving entitlement. The Superintendent of Central Excise was treated as a proper officer for issuing the recovery notice under the Central Excise Rules, and the jurisdictional objection was not entertained at the reference stage. The Larger Bench view was applied that deemed credit is confined to inputs that have in fact suffered excise duty, so the reference was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:53:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85938" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (3) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47419</link>
      <description>Deemed Modvat credit under Rule 57G(2) was held unavailable on unserviceable railway material that admittedly had not suffered duty; the eligibility turned on the factual finding that the inputs were non-duty paid, and the assessee failed to discharge the burden of proving entitlement. The Superintendent of Central Excise was treated as a proper officer for issuing the recovery notice under the Central Excise Rules, and the jurisdictional objection was not entertained at the reference stage. The Larger Bench view was applied that deemed credit is confined to inputs that have in fact suffered excise duty, so the reference was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Mar 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>