<?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>1997 (4) TMI 139 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86661</link>
    <description>Weighing machines used for weighment of raw materials were treated as part of the manufacturing process and, on that basis, as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q. Modvat credit was also not denied merely because the invoice omitted the consignee&#039;s name and address, where the omission was a verifiable clerical defect and the duty-paid goods were shown to have been received for the assessee. Credit remained available on an endorsed invoice where one unit of the assessee placed the order and another unit received the goods, since the endorsement and internal ordering arrangement did not defeat entitlement. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and credit was upheld on all disputed items.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:53:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=123728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 139 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86661</link>
      <description>Weighing machines used for weighment of raw materials were treated as part of the manufacturing process and, on that basis, as capital goods eligible for Modvat credit under Rule 57Q. Modvat credit was also not denied merely because the invoice omitted the consignee&#039;s name and address, where the omission was a verifiable clerical defect and the duty-paid goods were shown to have been received for the assessee. Credit remained available on an endorsed invoice where one unit of the assessee placed the order and another unit received the goods, since the endorsement and internal ordering arrangement did not defeat entitlement. The Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and credit was upheld on all disputed items.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>