<?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>2000 (2) TMI 349 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93425</link>
    <description>Invoices issued before the deferred registration date were treated as prima facie acceptable for Modvat credit because the Board circular extended the effective date for registration and covered such invoices. The demand based on those invoices was therefore considered prima facie unsustainable. A separate demand concerning rejected and returned material after processing was also regarded as covered by Tribunal decisions recognising rejected material as a usable input and by the rule permitting clearance of inputs on payment of duty. On that basis, the appellant was found to have a strong prima facie case, and pre-deposit was waived with stay of recovery of the demanded duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:32:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=130486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (2) TMI 349 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93425</link>
      <description>Invoices issued before the deferred registration date were treated as prima facie acceptable for Modvat credit because the Board circular extended the effective date for registration and covered such invoices. The demand based on those invoices was therefore considered prima facie unsustainable. A separate demand concerning rejected and returned material after processing was also regarded as covered by Tribunal decisions recognising rejected material as a usable input and by the rule permitting clearance of inputs on payment of duty. On that basis, the appellant was found to have a strong prima facie case, and pre-deposit was waived with stay of recovery of the demanded duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=93425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>