<?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 (8) TMI 834 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99144</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was claimed on the strength of original invoices, although the Central Excise Rules required the duplicate or transporter&#039;s copy. Permission to continue using old stationery was limited up to 30-4-1994, and the invoices at issue were issued later, so that permission did not assist. The circular relied on by the assessee concerned transitory provisions for registered dealers under a different scheme and did not apply to manufacturer-issued invoices on these facts. The larger Bench view that credit is not available on invoices other than the prescribed duplicate copy was treated as controlling, and the credit was held inadmissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:58:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=136201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 834 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99144</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was claimed on the strength of original invoices, although the Central Excise Rules required the duplicate or transporter&#039;s copy. Permission to continue using old stationery was limited up to 30-4-1994, and the invoices at issue were issued later, so that permission did not assist. The circular relied on by the assessee concerned transitory provisions for registered dealers under a different scheme and did not apply to manufacturer-issued invoices on these facts. The larger Bench view that credit is not available on invoices other than the prescribed duplicate copy was treated as controlling, and the credit was held inadmissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>