<?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>1996 (7) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85538</link>
    <description>The case involved a dispute over the denial of Modvat credit to Ice-cream manufacturers. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision, allowing the manufacturers&#039; appeal and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The issues revolved around the interpretation of notifications regarding gate passes and invoices issued by dealers. The Tribunal found that gate passes endorsed after a certain date were valid, and common dealers could also issue eligible invoices if they bought goods directly from the manufacturer. The judgment emphasized the inclusion of dealers in the Modvat scheme post-Budget 1994 and rejected the Revenue&#039;s restrictive interpretation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 16:50:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122605" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (7) TMI 285 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85538</link>
      <description>The case involved a dispute over the denial of Modvat credit to Ice-cream manufacturers. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision, allowing the manufacturers&#039; appeal and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The issues revolved around the interpretation of notifications regarding gate passes and invoices issued by dealers. The Tribunal found that gate passes endorsed after a certain date were valid, and common dealers could also issue eligible invoices if they bought goods directly from the manufacturer. The judgment emphasized the inclusion of dealers in the Modvat scheme post-Budget 1994 and rejected the Revenue&#039;s restrictive interpretation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>