<?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 (12) TMI 609 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116093</link>
    <description>Modvat credit taken on invoices more than six months old was inadmissible under Rule 57G, because the credit was availed well after the permissible period. The Tribunal held that the later return of goods and debit of duty under Rule 57F(1)(ii) did not cure the original defect, since the demand was confined to credit wrongly taken in 1995 on stale invoices. The denial of credit was therefore upheld, and the appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 12:12:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153091" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 609 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116093</link>
      <description>Modvat credit taken on invoices more than six months old was inadmissible under Rule 57G, because the credit was availed well after the permissible period. The Tribunal held that the later return of goods and debit of duty under Rule 57F(1)(ii) did not cure the original defect, since the demand was confined to credit wrongly taken in 1995 on stale invoices. The denial of credit was therefore upheld, and the appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>