<?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 (1) TMI 474 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94825</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the maintainability of appeals with amounts below Rs. 50,000 and the denial of Modvat credit for inputs without accompanying certificates. The Tribunal overruled the objection raised by the Departmental Representative regarding the maintainability of appeals and allowed the appeals of the 12 appellants regarding the denial of Modvat credit. The Tribunal emphasized that manufacturers could claim Modvat credit even if certificates were issued after the removal of goods but before claiming the credit, highlighting that the Commissioner should have followed Tribunal decisions and administrative instructions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 10:58:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131884" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (1) TMI 474 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94825</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in a case concerning the maintainability of appeals with amounts below Rs. 50,000 and the denial of Modvat credit for inputs without accompanying certificates. The Tribunal overruled the objection raised by the Departmental Representative regarding the maintainability of appeals and allowed the appeals of the 12 appellants regarding the denial of Modvat credit. The Tribunal emphasized that manufacturers could claim Modvat credit even if certificates were issued after the removal of goods but before claiming the credit, highlighting that the Commissioner should have followed Tribunal decisions and administrative instructions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94825</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>