<?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>2002 (4) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51413</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on glass shell and electron gun used in 14&quot; picture tubes could be used to pay duty on 17&quot; and 20&quot; picture tubes because the scheme did not require one-to-one correlation where the final products were similar. The Tribunal held that &quot;similar&quot; means goods need not be identical, only generally alike, and treated 14&quot;, 17&quot; and 20&quot; black-and-white picture tubes as falling within the same class for credit utilisation. The assessee was therefore entitled to use the credit. The question of refund and lapse of credit turned on factual recalculation, so the matter was remanded for limited verification of the lapsed credit, relevant period, and any refundable amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 16:17:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89891" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (4) TMI 178 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51413</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on glass shell and electron gun used in 14&quot; picture tubes could be used to pay duty on 17&quot; and 20&quot; picture tubes because the scheme did not require one-to-one correlation where the final products were similar. The Tribunal held that &quot;similar&quot; means goods need not be identical, only generally alike, and treated 14&quot;, 17&quot; and 20&quot; black-and-white picture tubes as falling within the same class for credit utilisation. The assessee was therefore entitled to use the credit. The question of refund and lapse of credit turned on factual recalculation, so the matter was remanded for limited verification of the lapsed credit, relevant period, and any refundable amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51413</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>