<?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>2011 (2) TMI 198 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204193</link>
    <description>CENVAT/MODVAT credit remained admissible on the full invoiced quantity where the inputs were received under valid invoices and the small difference between invoice weight and factory weighment was only a minor variation within prescribed tolerance limits under the Standards of Weights and Measures regime. The earlier view that no inflexible standard can be applied to weighment differences was followed, and the absence of any proof of diversion, transit loss, or receipt of non-duty-paid inputs meant the credit could not be restricted to the lower factory weight. The Revenue&#039;s objection to the marginal shortage was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Feb 2012 13:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 198 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204193</link>
      <description>CENVAT/MODVAT credit remained admissible on the full invoiced quantity where the inputs were received under valid invoices and the small difference between invoice weight and factory weighment was only a minor variation within prescribed tolerance limits under the Standards of Weights and Measures regime. The earlier view that no inflexible standard can be applied to weighment differences was followed, and the absence of any proof of diversion, transit loss, or receipt of non-duty-paid inputs meant the credit could not be restricted to the lower factory weight. The Revenue&#039;s objection to the marginal shortage was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>