<?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 (8) TMI 548 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118775</link>
    <description>Modvat credit should not be denied for a mere procedural lapse where invoices lacked authentication by the proper officer but otherwise contained the required particulars. Rule 57G, as amended, was read as curing minor defects when the document showed the description of goods, assessable value, and the name and address of the factory or warehouse. A Board circular also indicated that pending matters should be decided on that basis and that credit should not fail without checking whether the inputs had suffered duty and were meant for manufacture. As the invoices were complete in substance and duty payment was verified, authentication alone was not decisive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:26:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155772" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 548 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118775</link>
      <description>Modvat credit should not be denied for a mere procedural lapse where invoices lacked authentication by the proper officer but otherwise contained the required particulars. Rule 57G, as amended, was read as curing minor defects when the document showed the description of goods, assessable value, and the name and address of the factory or warehouse. A Board circular also indicated that pending matters should be decided on that basis and that credit should not fail without checking whether the inputs had suffered duty and were meant for manufacture. As the invoices were complete in substance and duty payment was verified, authentication alone was not decisive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118775</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>