<?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 (5) TMI 516 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115285</link>
    <description>The appellants were denied Modvat credit due to the alleged use of a different Bill of Entry. However, the Tribunal found that the credit was rightfully claimed based on the correct Bill of Entry. As there was no evidence to support the Revenue&#039;s claim, the denial was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and allowing their appeal with consequential relief as per law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 16:30:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152284" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (5) TMI 516 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115285</link>
      <description>The appellants were denied Modvat credit due to the alleged use of a different Bill of Entry. However, the Tribunal found that the credit was rightfully claimed based on the correct Bill of Entry. As there was no evidence to support the Revenue&#039;s claim, the denial was deemed unjustified. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the impugned order and allowing their appeal with consequential relief as per law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115285</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>