<?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>2004 (6) TMI 176 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53232</link>
    <description>On removal of capital goods as such, reversal of the Modvat credit actually availed satisfies the statutory requirement, and no further duty can be demanded merely because the goods would otherwise attract a higher notional rate. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had cleared an imported tank to its own unit after reversing the proportionate credit taken, and treated the credit availed and reversed as substantively the same. It also held that the earlier precedent left the position settled in favour of the assessee, while the Revenue&#039;s cited decision was irrelevant. The demand for differential duty was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:10:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91709" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 176 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53232</link>
      <description>On removal of capital goods as such, reversal of the Modvat credit actually availed satisfies the statutory requirement, and no further duty can be demanded merely because the goods would otherwise attract a higher notional rate. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had cleared an imported tank to its own unit after reversing the proportionate credit taken, and treated the credit availed and reversed as substantively the same. It also held that the earlier precedent left the position settled in favour of the assessee, while the Revenue&#039;s cited decision was irrelevant. The demand for differential duty was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>