<?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>2001 (10) TMI 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51055</link>
    <description>A lathe machine used only for smoothing and repairing rollers of a cold rolling mill was not accepted as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q. On the admitted facts, it was neither an accessory nor part of the rolling mill, and the record did not show use in the manufacture of the final product. A claim based on indirect use in manufacture was therefore rejected on the facts of the case, and denial of Modvat credit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:05:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89534" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 236 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51055</link>
      <description>A lathe machine used only for smoothing and repairing rollers of a cold rolling mill was not accepted as capital goods for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q. On the admitted facts, it was neither an accessory nor part of the rolling mill, and the record did not show use in the manufacture of the final product. A claim based on indirect use in manufacture was therefore rejected on the facts of the case, and denial of Modvat credit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51055</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>