<?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>2000 (3) TMI 119 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50014</link>
    <description>Rule 57Q was treated as covering capital goods such as plant, machinery, equipment and functionally connected auxiliary items, even where they did not directly participate in manufacture. Credit was therefore upheld for items falling within that wider functional nexus, but denied for milling machine and precision lathe used for repair work, EPBAX, lighting fittings, air-conditioner, and steel structurals and cement used for plant construction, as these were considered peripheral or pre-plant construction materials rather than capital goods. Penalty was held unsustainable because a wrong credit claim, supported by a plausible interpretation and comparable decisions, did not by itself show conscious delinquency.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 11:49:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (3) TMI 119 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50014</link>
      <description>Rule 57Q was treated as covering capital goods such as plant, machinery, equipment and functionally connected auxiliary items, even where they did not directly participate in manufacture. Credit was therefore upheld for items falling within that wider functional nexus, but denied for milling machine and precision lathe used for repair work, EPBAX, lighting fittings, air-conditioner, and steel structurals and cement used for plant construction, as these were considered peripheral or pre-plant construction materials rather than capital goods. Penalty was held unsustainable because a wrong credit claim, supported by a plausible interpretation and comparable decisions, did not by itself show conscious delinquency.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>