<?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>2012 (5) TMI 429 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213592</link>
    <description>CENVAT credit could not be denied where both lower authorities had found that the assessee received the goods in its factory as well as the invoices, and the department produced no evidence to dislodge those findings or to show the assessee&#039;s participation in any supplier-side fraud. The Revenue&#039;s reliance on a statement did not outweigh the evidence on record, and the cited precedents were distinguished because they involved cases where goods were not received or invoices were not issued in the ordinary course of trade. In the absence of proof supporting the demand, the penalty also could not be sustained, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2012 18:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=186993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 429 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213592</link>
      <description>CENVAT credit could not be denied where both lower authorities had found that the assessee received the goods in its factory as well as the invoices, and the department produced no evidence to dislodge those findings or to show the assessee&#039;s participation in any supplier-side fraud. The Revenue&#039;s reliance on a statement did not outweigh the evidence on record, and the cited precedents were distinguished because they involved cases where goods were not received or invoices were not issued in the ordinary course of trade. In the absence of proof supporting the demand, the penalty also could not be sustained, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213592</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>