<?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 (3) TMI 163 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51432</link>
    <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57Q was held admissible where the assessee was not shown to fall within the compounded levy regime under Section 3A, because there was no valid determination of capacity or proof of duty payment under that scheme. Credit on Boric Acid and HR Sheets was also treated as admissible input credit under Rule 57A, as both materials were used in relation to manufacture. Credit on the HPCL document was time-barred because the six-month limit ran from the duty-paying delivery challan. Credit on Pig Iron could not be denied merely because the supplier allegedly paid higher duty, and the penalty was set aside on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2010 17:18:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 163 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51432</link>
      <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57Q was held admissible where the assessee was not shown to fall within the compounded levy regime under Section 3A, because there was no valid determination of capacity or proof of duty payment under that scheme. Credit on Boric Acid and HR Sheets was also treated as admissible input credit under Rule 57A, as both materials were used in relation to manufacture. Credit on the HPCL document was time-barred because the six-month limit ran from the duty-paying delivery challan. Credit on Pig Iron could not be denied merely because the supplier allegedly paid higher duty, and the penalty was set aside on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>