<?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>1993 (6) TMI 96 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48714</link>
    <description>Modvat credit disputes confined to the admissibility of input credit and the description of inputs in the declaration are treated as separate from supplier-side classification controversies. Where the only live question is whether credit on inputs is correctly claimed, and any later variation in duty at the supplier&#039;s end can be adjusted under Rule 57E, the matter does not become one involving classification, valuation, or rate of duty for assessment purposes. On that basis, the dispute is considered suitable for Regional Bench jurisdiction rather than Special Bench jurisdiction, even if the supplier had paid duty under protest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2023 13:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87194" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (6) TMI 96 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI-LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48714</link>
      <description>Modvat credit disputes confined to the admissibility of input credit and the description of inputs in the declaration are treated as separate from supplier-side classification controversies. Where the only live question is whether credit on inputs is correctly claimed, and any later variation in duty at the supplier&#039;s end can be adjusted under Rule 57E, the matter does not become one involving classification, valuation, or rate of duty for assessment purposes. On that basis, the dispute is considered suitable for Regional Bench jurisdiction rather than Special Bench jurisdiction, even if the supplier had paid duty under protest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jun 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>