<?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 (12) TMI 266 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87909</link>
    <description>Rule 57G recognised invoices issued under Rule 52A as valid documents for Modvat credit, but that reference carried the procedural condition in Rule 52A(3) that the duplicate copy was the copy to be used for credit. A later notification permitting credit on invoices or other documents did not remove that copy-specific requirement. On the stated facts, original invoice copies were therefore not valid duty paying documents for Modvat credit, and the credit disallowance was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 17:15:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (12) TMI 266 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87909</link>
      <description>Rule 57G recognised invoices issued under Rule 52A as valid documents for Modvat credit, but that reference carried the procedural condition in Rule 52A(3) that the duplicate copy was the copy to be used for credit. A later notification permitting credit on invoices or other documents did not remove that copy-specific requirement. On the stated facts, original invoice copies were therefore not valid duty paying documents for Modvat credit, and the credit disallowance was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87909</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>