<?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 (9) TMI 182 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54708</link>
    <description>MODVAT credit under Rule 57Q(1) was allowed for research and development equipment, module, gas detection system, lube and tower packing because they functioned as plant, machinery, accessories or supporting items used to produce, process, maintain or improve manufacture. The provision was applied broadly to items integral to the manufacturing setup, so credit on those goods was upheld. By contrast, safety tools used only for chipping RCC floor and repairing civil works were outside capital goods, as they were not used in or in relation to manufacture of final products. Credit on those tools was denied, leaving only a partial allowance of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:11:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93185" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 182 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54708</link>
      <description>MODVAT credit under Rule 57Q(1) was allowed for research and development equipment, module, gas detection system, lube and tower packing because they functioned as plant, machinery, accessories or supporting items used to produce, process, maintain or improve manufacture. The provision was applied broadly to items integral to the manufacturing setup, so credit on those goods was upheld. By contrast, safety tools used only for chipping RCC floor and repairing civil works were outside capital goods, as they were not used in or in relation to manufacture of final products. Credit on those tools was denied, leaving only a partial allowance of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54708</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>