<?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>2002 (6) TMI 251 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102480</link>
    <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices were unauthenticated where the duty-paid nature of the documents was not in dispute. The defect was procedural, and a procedural lapse alone was insufficient to defeat substantive entitlement to credit once payment of duty was otherwise established. On that basis, denial of credit on the sole ground of unauthenticated invoices was unsustainable, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 10:54:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139528" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (6) TMI 251 - CEGAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102480</link>
      <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because invoices were unauthenticated where the duty-paid nature of the documents was not in dispute. The defect was procedural, and a procedural lapse alone was insufficient to defeat substantive entitlement to credit once payment of duty was otherwise established. On that basis, denial of credit on the sole ground of unauthenticated invoices was unsustainable, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>