<?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 (11) TMI 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122143</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 31,927, as previous decisions supported such credit in similar situations where the Bill of Entry was in the name of the Head Office. However, the denial of credit amounting to Rs. 772 based on an invoice from an unregistered dealer was upheld, as there was no evidence of registration before the specified deadline. The penalty of Rs. 5000 was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Aug 2012 18:35:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122143</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the denial of Modvat credit of Rs. 31,927, as previous decisions supported such credit in similar situations where the Bill of Entry was in the name of the Head Office. However, the denial of credit amounting to Rs. 772 based on an invoice from an unregistered dealer was upheld, as there was no evidence of registration before the specified deadline. The penalty of Rs. 5000 was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122143</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>