<?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>1995 (9) TMI 156 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84543</link>
    <description>Modvat credit demand based mainly on third-party statements recorded behind the assessee&#039;s back could not stand where no effective opportunity for cross-examination was given. The untested statements were therefore unreliable, especially after remand had been directed for that purpose and no proper steps were taken to secure witness attendance. The record also showed statutory accounts, entry and use of inputs in manufacture, defacement of duty-paid documents, and payment by account-payee cheque, which supported the genuineness of the transactions. On that basis, the Department failed to prove that the gate passes were fictitious, and the demand was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:48:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (9) TMI 156 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84543</link>
      <description>Modvat credit demand based mainly on third-party statements recorded behind the assessee&#039;s back could not stand where no effective opportunity for cross-examination was given. The untested statements were therefore unreliable, especially after remand had been directed for that purpose and no proper steps were taken to secure witness attendance. The record also showed statutory accounts, entry and use of inputs in manufacture, defacement of duty-paid documents, and payment by account-payee cheque, which supported the genuineness of the transactions. On that basis, the Department failed to prove that the gate passes were fictitious, and the demand was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Sep 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84543</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>