<?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 (10) TMI 141 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84856</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on certified challans issued by a public sector undertaking had to be tested against the Board&#039;s controlling prescription under Rule 57G. The Tribunal noted that later trade notices suggested a restricted category of acceptable certificates, so the claimed credit appeared doubtful, but the governing Board letters and instructions were not before it. Because the correct legal position could be determined only after examining those foundational materials, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal also disapproved the practice of prescribing evidentiary documents through internal letters to Collectors and trade notices, holding that the power to prescribe such documents lay with the Board itself.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Aug 2011 11:43:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121923" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (10) TMI 141 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84856</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on certified challans issued by a public sector undertaking had to be tested against the Board&#039;s controlling prescription under Rule 57G. The Tribunal noted that later trade notices suggested a restricted category of acceptable certificates, so the claimed credit appeared doubtful, but the governing Board letters and instructions were not before it. Because the correct legal position could be determined only after examining those foundational materials, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal also disapproved the practice of prescribing evidentiary documents through internal letters to Collectors and trade notices, holding that the power to prescribe such documents lay with the Board itself.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Oct 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>