<?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>2010 (2) TMI 608 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201432</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied merely because the goods were imported by another entity, where the bill of entry was endorsed in favour of the assessee. Ownership of the goods was not treated as decisive for denying credit, and the endorsed bill of entry supported the assessee&#039;s entitlement. On that basis, the ground for denial did not survive, and credit was held admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2011 23:14:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175041" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 608 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201432</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied merely because the goods were imported by another entity, where the bill of entry was endorsed in favour of the assessee. Ownership of the goods was not treated as decisive for denying credit, and the endorsed bill of entry supported the assessee&#039;s entitlement. On that basis, the ground for denial did not survive, and credit was held admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>