<?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>2003 (3) TMI 210 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52149</link>
    <description>Modvat credit reversal paid before notice could not be pursued under Section 11A when the governing recovery route was Rule 57-I(2), and the fiction in Rule 57F(1)(ii) did not create an independent duty levy. Inputs brought into the factory for trading were not liable to confiscation under Rule 51A, which applied to goods for manufacture, and Rule 210 could not be used residually where no breach supporting confiscation was established. As the underlying confiscability failed, penalties and confiscation of plant, machinery and building under Rules 173Q and 209A also could not survive. The adjudication adverse to the assessee was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Oct 2010 16:16:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90627" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 210 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52149</link>
      <description>Modvat credit reversal paid before notice could not be pursued under Section 11A when the governing recovery route was Rule 57-I(2), and the fiction in Rule 57F(1)(ii) did not create an independent duty levy. Inputs brought into the factory for trading were not liable to confiscation under Rule 51A, which applied to goods for manufacture, and Rule 210 could not be used residually where no breach supporting confiscation was established. As the underlying confiscability failed, penalties and confiscation of plant, machinery and building under Rules 173Q and 209A also could not survive. The adjudication adverse to the assessee was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52149</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>