<?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 (2) TMI 252 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53260</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods was confined to use in the manufacturer&#039;s factory under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Capital goods used in mines situated beneath the factory premises did not satisfy that requirement because the mines, though under common ownership with the concentration plant, were not part of the factory. The definition of factory covered the premises and precincts where manufacturing or an incidental process was carried on, but not underground mines located below the factory area. Earlier decisions cited by the assessee were distinguished on their facts, and the credit claim was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:59:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 252 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53260</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods was confined to use in the manufacturer&#039;s factory under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. Capital goods used in mines situated beneath the factory premises did not satisfy that requirement because the mines, though under common ownership with the concentration plant, were not part of the factory. The definition of factory covered the premises and precincts where manufacturing or an incidental process was carried on, but not underground mines located below the factory area. Earlier decisions cited by the assessee were distinguished on their facts, and the credit claim was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53260</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>