<?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>2004 (6) TMI 432 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112180</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on invoices issued by a 100% export oriented unit was treated as unavailable where the supplier was not competent to issue the invoice under the excise rules. The invoice was considered valid only if issued in accordance with Rule 100E of the Central Excise Rules, and the document relied on did not meet that requirement. Because the invoice lacked the necessary legal basis and could not support duty credit, the credit taken on its strength was held unsustainable and the assessee&#039;s claim failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 18:58:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 432 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112180</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on invoices issued by a 100% export oriented unit was treated as unavailable where the supplier was not competent to issue the invoice under the excise rules. The invoice was considered valid only if issued in accordance with Rule 100E of the Central Excise Rules, and the document relied on did not meet that requirement. Because the invoice lacked the necessary legal basis and could not support duty credit, the credit taken on its strength was held unsustainable and the assessee&#039;s claim failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>