<?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>1994 (10) TMI 190 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84365</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was denied where gate passes carried multiple undated endorsements, the corresponding invoice particulars were not furnished, and the prescribed verification documents were absent. The tribunal held that the cited precedent did not authorise automatic credit; it contemplated remand only when the documentary trail was sufficiently clear to enable verification that the goods had passed through subsequent stages and that no intervening person had taken credit. Because the material produced did not satisfy those evidentiary and documentary requirements, the assessee failed to establish entitlement to credit and the departmental denial was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 15:25:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 190 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84365</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was denied where gate passes carried multiple undated endorsements, the corresponding invoice particulars were not furnished, and the prescribed verification documents were absent. The tribunal held that the cited precedent did not authorise automatic credit; it contemplated remand only when the documentary trail was sufficiently clear to enable verification that the goods had passed through subsequent stages and that no intervening person had taken credit. Because the material produced did not satisfy those evidentiary and documentary requirements, the assessee failed to establish entitlement to credit and the departmental denial was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>