<?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>2001 (2) TMI 523 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96063</link>
    <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57G(5) had to be taken within six months from the date of issue of the duty paying documents. The six-month limit was treated as a substantive condition of entitlement, not a mere procedural requirement, so credit availed after that period was inadmissible. The rule was held to attach the time limit directly to the right to claim credit, and a late claim could not be treated as a curable defect in particulars.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 18:46:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=133122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 523 - CEGAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96063</link>
      <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57G(5) had to be taken within six months from the date of issue of the duty paying documents. The six-month limit was treated as a substantive condition of entitlement, not a mere procedural requirement, so credit availed after that period was inadmissible. The rule was held to attach the time limit directly to the right to claim credit, and a late claim could not be treated as a curable defect in particulars.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>