<?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 (8) TMI 276 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53466</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on volatile petroleum inputs could not be denied merely because a minor short receipt arose from transit, handling, evaporation, dryage, or measurement variation, where duty had been paid on the full invoice value and the shortage was satisfactorily explained. The Tribunal treated the loss as permissible transit or handling loss and held the credit admissible. It also noted that credit had been reversed before the show-cause notice was issued, so suppression was not established, extended limitation was unavailable, and penalty and interest were not sustainable. The consequential demand was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 12:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91943" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 276 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53466</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on volatile petroleum inputs could not be denied merely because a minor short receipt arose from transit, handling, evaporation, dryage, or measurement variation, where duty had been paid on the full invoice value and the shortage was satisfactorily explained. The Tribunal treated the loss as permissible transit or handling loss and held the credit admissible. It also noted that credit had been reversed before the show-cause notice was issued, so suppression was not established, extended limitation was unavailable, and penalty and interest were not sustainable. The consequential demand was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53466</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>