<?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 243 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52228</link>
    <description>Pneumatic Conveying System used within the factory for unloading and handling fly ash qualified as material-handling equipment and fell within the Chapter 84 description of capital goods under Rule 57Q, so Modvat credit was allowable. Its parts, spares and accessories were also eligible. The invoice described the goods under Heading 84.14, and the later corrigendum supported that the goods had been duly declared. The lower appellate authority could not deny credit by independently reclassifying the goods under Chapter 87 when the proper classification had already been adopted by the manufacturer. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2010 13:07:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90706" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 243 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52228</link>
      <description>Pneumatic Conveying System used within the factory for unloading and handling fly ash qualified as material-handling equipment and fell within the Chapter 84 description of capital goods under Rule 57Q, so Modvat credit was allowable. Its parts, spares and accessories were also eligible. The invoice described the goods under Heading 84.14, and the later corrigendum supported that the goods had been duly declared. The lower appellate authority could not deny credit by independently reclassifying the goods under Chapter 87 when the proper classification had already been adopted by the manufacturer. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</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=52228</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>