<?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 (11) TMI 162 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52377</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on additional excise duty paid on duty-paid inputs used to manufacture dutiable tyres could not be denied merely because an intermediate product was exempt from that duty. The scheme restricted credit where the final product was exempt, not where only an intermediate stage product was exempt. The refusal to restore credit was therefore unsustainable, and unutilised credit relating to tyres exported under bond was refundable where adjustment against duty was not possible. The clarificatory notifications and circulars supported this treatment, and the refund rejection failed on the same incorrect premise as the credit denial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Oct 2010 15:01:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (11) TMI 162 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52377</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on additional excise duty paid on duty-paid inputs used to manufacture dutiable tyres could not be denied merely because an intermediate product was exempt from that duty. The scheme restricted credit where the final product was exempt, not where only an intermediate stage product was exempt. The refusal to restore credit was therefore unsustainable, and unutilised credit relating to tyres exported under bond was refundable where adjustment against duty was not possible. The clarificatory notifications and circulars supported this treatment, and the refund rejection failed on the same incorrect premise as the credit denial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>