<?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 (7) TMI 215 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54346</link>
    <description>Furnace oil used as fuel to generate electricity remained eligible as an input for Modvat credit where the electricity was wheeled from one unit to other units of the same manufacturer and used in the manufacture of excisable goods. The definition of &quot;input&quot; was applied broadly to cover fuel used for generating electricity connected with manufacture, and the relevant phrase &quot;factory of production&quot; was read in line with the factory producing the final product, not confined to the unit where electricity was generated. The contrary Revenue authorities were distinguished as involving different language, and cross-unit commercial use of electricity within the same manufacturing set-up was treated as consistent with the credit scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 13:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92823" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 215 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54346</link>
      <description>Furnace oil used as fuel to generate electricity remained eligible as an input for Modvat credit where the electricity was wheeled from one unit to other units of the same manufacturer and used in the manufacture of excisable goods. The definition of &quot;input&quot; was applied broadly to cover fuel used for generating electricity connected with manufacture, and the relevant phrase &quot;factory of production&quot; was read in line with the factory producing the final product, not confined to the unit where electricity was generated. The contrary Revenue authorities were distinguished as involving different language, and cross-unit commercial use of electricity within the same manufacturing set-up was treated as consistent with the credit scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>