<?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>2006 (3) TMI 452 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117792</link>
    <description>Notification No. 58/97-C.E. allowed payment for inputs by cheque drawn on the assessee&#039;s own bank account, bank draft, or banker&#039;s cheque. The key issue was whether payment through a bank demand draft under a letter of credit satisfied this condition. The record, including the bank certificate, showed that the consignments were paid for by bank demand draft and that the notification did not require the draft to be drawn from the assessee&#039;s own account. The appellants therefore met the notification requirement and were entitled to the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:44:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 452 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117792</link>
      <description>Notification No. 58/97-C.E. allowed payment for inputs by cheque drawn on the assessee&#039;s own bank account, bank draft, or banker&#039;s cheque. The key issue was whether payment through a bank demand draft under a letter of credit satisfied this condition. The record, including the bank certificate, showed that the consignments were paid for by bank demand draft and that the notification did not require the draft to be drawn from the assessee&#039;s own account. The appellants therefore met the notification requirement and were entitled to the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>