<?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>1998 (3) TMI 336 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88615</link>
    <description>A declaration under Rule 57G was construed as a whole: the broad description of inputs as MS Plates and GP Sheets was held to cover the goods actually received, and the stated tariff heading was treated as only a general qualifier, making the difference in tariff classification immaterial. Invoice correlation also could not be rejected merely because the manufacturer&#039;s invoice and the registered dealer&#039;s invoice showed different quantities or duty amounts, where the invoices otherwise reflected the onward sale chain and no independent evidence proved that the goods were different. Credit disallowance was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 12:01:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125680" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (3) TMI 336 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88615</link>
      <description>A declaration under Rule 57G was construed as a whole: the broad description of inputs as MS Plates and GP Sheets was held to cover the goods actually received, and the stated tariff heading was treated as only a general qualifier, making the difference in tariff classification immaterial. Invoice correlation also could not be rejected merely because the manufacturer&#039;s invoice and the registered dealer&#039;s invoice showed different quantities or duty amounts, where the invoices otherwise reflected the onward sale chain and no independent evidence proved that the goods were different. Credit disallowance was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Mar 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>