<?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 (12) TMI 240 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52577</link>
    <description>Credit reversal under Rule 57CC, Rule 57AD(2) and Rule 6(3)(b) applies only where common inputs are used in both dutiable and exempted final products. Here, the disputed chemicals were used only in the manufacture of sugar, while the exempted bio-compost was produced from pressmud and waste matter. As the inputs were not used in relation to the exempted product, the statutory condition for reversal was not met, and the demand, penalty and interest could not be sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 18:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 240 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52577</link>
      <description>Credit reversal under Rule 57CC, Rule 57AD(2) and Rule 6(3)(b) applies only where common inputs are used in both dutiable and exempted final products. Here, the disputed chemicals were used only in the manufacture of sugar, while the exempted bio-compost was produced from pressmud and waste matter. As the inputs were not used in relation to the exempted product, the statutory condition for reversal was not met, and the demand, penalty and interest could not be sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>