<?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 (7) TMI 53 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214478</link>
    <description>The judge set aside the denial of input credit based on handwritten or rubber-stamped invoice numbers, ruling that compliance with the serial numbering requirement sufficed under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellants&#039; appeals were allowed, emphasizing adherence to rule provisions over the necessity for printed invoice numbers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 12:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187872" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 53 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214478</link>
      <description>The judge set aside the denial of input credit based on handwritten or rubber-stamped invoice numbers, ruling that compliance with the serial numbering requirement sufficed under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. The appellants&#039; appeals were allowed, emphasizing adherence to rule provisions over the necessity for printed invoice numbers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214478</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>