<?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>2005 (2) TMI 190 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53815</link>
    <description>Refund of unutilised Cenvat credit under Rule 57AC(7) and Notification No. 35/2000 was available only where the manufacturer could not adjust the accumulated credit against duty on domestic clearances or export clearances on payment of duty. Condition No. 5 of the notification restricted cash refund to situations of genuine inability to use the credit during the relevant quarter or month. On the facts placed before CESTAT, the assessees had satisfied that condition and the Revenue showed no contrary basis to dispute the Commissioner (Appeals) order. No prima facie case for stay was therefore made out, and the stay applications were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:54:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92292" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 190 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53815</link>
      <description>Refund of unutilised Cenvat credit under Rule 57AC(7) and Notification No. 35/2000 was available only where the manufacturer could not adjust the accumulated credit against duty on domestic clearances or export clearances on payment of duty. Condition No. 5 of the notification restricted cash refund to situations of genuine inability to use the credit during the relevant quarter or month. On the facts placed before CESTAT, the assessees had satisfied that condition and the Revenue showed no contrary basis to dispute the Commissioner (Appeals) order. No prima facie case for stay was therefore made out, and the stay applications were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>