<?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 (12) TMI 109 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49032</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was treated as admissible on moisture evaporated from phospho gypsum during storage and use in cement manufacture because the input had been received in full quantity on duty-paid invoiced weight, including moisture. The negligible moisture loss was characterised as evaporation due to atmospheric conditions and the manufacturing process, not as loss of the input itself before use. On that basis, the relevant quantity for credit remained the quantity received in the factory, and credit could not be denied merely because moisture later evaporated. The note aligns this approach with earlier Tribunal decisions treating such evaporation as admissible process loss.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:31:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87512" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 109 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49032</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was treated as admissible on moisture evaporated from phospho gypsum during storage and use in cement manufacture because the input had been received in full quantity on duty-paid invoiced weight, including moisture. The negligible moisture loss was characterised as evaporation due to atmospheric conditions and the manufacturing process, not as loss of the input itself before use. On that basis, the relevant quantity for credit remained the quantity received in the factory, and credit could not be denied merely because moisture later evaporated. The note aligns this approach with earlier Tribunal decisions treating such evaporation as admissible process loss.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>