<?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 (7) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89108</link>
    <description>Modvat credit cannot be denied solely because the tariff heading in the declaration differed from the invoice where the input goods were identifiable and the only discrepancy was in classification after a chapter structure change. The identity of the goods was not in dispute, and the failure to update the declaration to match the revised sub-heading did not justify refusing credit on that ground alone. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:54:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126171" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (7) TMI 181 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89108</link>
      <description>Modvat credit cannot be denied solely because the tariff heading in the declaration differed from the invoice where the input goods were identifiable and the only discrepancy was in classification after a chapter structure change. The identity of the goods was not in dispute, and the failure to update the declaration to match the revised sub-heading did not justify refusing credit on that ground alone. The denial of credit was therefore unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>