<?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 (12) TMI 350 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117057</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was allowed only where the supporting document satisfied Rule 57GG: a dealer&#039;s invoice containing the prescribed particulars and evidencing receipt and use of duty-paid goods was accepted, but photocopies of original invoices and commercial invoices not recognised for Modvat purposes were rejected. The balance credit remained inadmissible. As the penalty had been computed on the full amount of disputed credit and part of that credit was either sustained or voluntarily reversed during adjudication, the penalty was correspondingly reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:18:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 350 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117057</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was allowed only where the supporting document satisfied Rule 57GG: a dealer&#039;s invoice containing the prescribed particulars and evidencing receipt and use of duty-paid goods was accepted, but photocopies of original invoices and commercial invoices not recognised for Modvat purposes were rejected. The balance credit remained inadmissible. As the penalty had been computed on the full amount of disputed credit and part of that credit was either sustained or voluntarily reversed during adjudication, the penalty was correspondingly reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>