<?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 293 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88942</link>
    <description>In a notified job-work or loan-licence arrangement, invoices issued in the principal manufacturer&#039;s name could be accepted as valid Modvat documents where the scheme placed valuation and duty responsibility on the principal and the goods were manufactured for that principal. Credit was therefore admissible on endorsed invoices despite the procedural objection. For branded inputs described in generic terms in the declaration, credit was not automatically barred, but it depended on proof that the received goods correlated with the declared description. On the facts, the principal Modvat issue succeeded, while the disputed branded input claim remained subject to verification, with a reduced penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 13:26:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 293 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88942</link>
      <description>In a notified job-work or loan-licence arrangement, invoices issued in the principal manufacturer&#039;s name could be accepted as valid Modvat documents where the scheme placed valuation and duty responsibility on the principal and the goods were manufactured for that principal. Credit was therefore admissible on endorsed invoices despite the procedural objection. For branded inputs described in generic terms in the declaration, credit was not automatically barred, but it depended on proof that the received goods correlated with the declared description. On the facts, the principal Modvat issue succeeded, while the disputed branded input claim remained subject to verification, with a reduced penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>