<?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>2014 (1) TMI 269 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242044</link>
    <description>Debit notes were treated as acceptable supporting documents for a prima facie Cenvat credit claim where they contained essential particulars such as the service provider&#039;s registration number, the recipient&#039;s name and the nature of service. Even if some notes did not record the recipient&#039;s address, the defect was regarded as curable under Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, particularly because receipt of the input services was not disputed. A new factual objection could not be raised at the appellate stage when it had not formed part of the show cause notice or the impugned order, and precedent was cited in support of debit notes as valid credit documents. The appellant was therefore considered entitled to unconditional stay of the pre-deposit demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 06:28:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341825" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 269 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242044</link>
      <description>Debit notes were treated as acceptable supporting documents for a prima facie Cenvat credit claim where they contained essential particulars such as the service provider&#039;s registration number, the recipient&#039;s name and the nature of service. Even if some notes did not record the recipient&#039;s address, the defect was regarded as curable under Rule 9(2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004, particularly because receipt of the input services was not disputed. A new factual objection could not be raised at the appellate stage when it had not formed part of the show cause notice or the impugned order, and precedent was cited in support of debit notes as valid credit documents. The appellant was therefore considered entitled to unconditional stay of the pre-deposit demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>