<?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 312 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90419</link>
    <description>During the early stage of invoice-based Modvat documentation, credit was treated as admissible where the inputs were shown to be duty paid, received in the factory, and used in the manufacture of the final product. Endorsed duty-paying invoices and credit notes were accepted as adequate documentary support in the transitional period, and credit could not be denied merely because the documentation was in an endorsed or evolving form.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:46:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=127481" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (9) TMI 312 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90419</link>
      <description>During the early stage of invoice-based Modvat documentation, credit was treated as admissible where the inputs were shown to be duty paid, received in the factory, and used in the manufacture of the final product. Endorsed duty-paying invoices and credit notes were accepted as adequate documentary support in the transitional period, and credit could not be denied merely because the documentation was in an endorsed or evolving form.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90419</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>