<?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 (9) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87294</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was treated as a substantive entitlement at the stay stage, and procedural objections about dealer registration and invoice particulars were held insufficient to justify denial where the inputs were duty-paid, duly declared, and no prima facie irregular availment was shown. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery stayed pending final hearing, with the merits left open for fuller examination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2011 10:59:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124361" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 222 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87294</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was treated as a substantive entitlement at the stay stage, and procedural objections about dealer registration and invoice particulars were held insufficient to justify denial where the inputs were duty-paid, duly declared, and no prima facie irregular availment was shown. On that basis, waiver of pre-deposit was granted and recovery stayed pending final hearing, with the merits left open for fuller examination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>