<?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>2005 (6) TMI 342 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115487</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi upheld the denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 28,024 to the Appellants by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to lack of corroborative evidence that the goods were re-rollable material. The Modvat credit was denied as the supplier described the goods as scrap in the invoices and failed to provide evidence that they were re-rollable material. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 10:40:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 342 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115487</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi upheld the denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 28,024 to the Appellants by the Commissioner (Appeals) due to lack of corroborative evidence that the goods were re-rollable material. The Modvat credit was denied as the supplier described the goods as scrap in the invoices and failed to provide evidence that they were re-rollable material. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115487</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>