<?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 (10) TMI 190 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87601</link>
    <description>Credit on duty-paid inputs could not be denied on a mere technical defect in the invoice, such as an incomplete address, where receipt of the inputs, their use in manufacture, duty payment, and absence of double availment were established. The incomplete address was treated as a curable irregularity, not a substantive ground for disallowance of credit. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:23:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124667" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (10) TMI 190 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87601</link>
      <description>Credit on duty-paid inputs could not be denied on a mere technical defect in the invoice, such as an incomplete address, where receipt of the inputs, their use in manufacture, duty payment, and absence of double availment were established. The incomplete address was treated as a curable irregularity, not a substantive ground for disallowance of credit. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87601</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>