<?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 (8) TMI 532 - CEGAT, new delhi</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105687</link>
    <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57G(6) could be allowed on original invoices only if the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner first satisfied himself that the duplicate transporter copies had been lost in transit, after considering the assessee&#039;s supporting material, including the representation and affidavit. The adjudicating authority failed to record any finding on that factual prerequisite and treated the case only as one of credit taken without prior permission. Because the loss of duplicate invoices and the admissibility of credit were distinct questions, the denial of credit could not stand and the matter had to be reconsidered with a speaking finding on loss and eligibility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 11:20:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (8) TMI 532 - CEGAT, new delhi</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105687</link>
      <description>Modvat credit under Rule 57G(6) could be allowed on original invoices only if the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner first satisfied himself that the duplicate transporter copies had been lost in transit, after considering the assessee&#039;s supporting material, including the representation and affidavit. The adjudicating authority failed to record any finding on that factual prerequisite and treated the case only as one of credit taken without prior permission. Because the loss of duplicate invoices and the admissibility of credit were distinct questions, the denial of credit could not stand and the matter had to be reconsidered with a speaking finding on loss and eligibility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>