<?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>2015 (2) TMI 556 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256556</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on scrap cannot be denied merely because invoice descriptions vary or the scrap moves through dealers at different prices, where the evidence shows the material was segregated into reusable and meltable forms and the price difference reflects quality and end use. Alleged substitution must be proved by reliable evidence linking the goods received to some other procurement; uncorroborated statements or a mismatch in nomenclature are insufficient. Credit also cannot be denied at the recipient&#039;s end simply because of the supplier&#039;s duty adjustment. On these principles, the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the grant of credit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:04:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=376134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 556 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256556</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on scrap cannot be denied merely because invoice descriptions vary or the scrap moves through dealers at different prices, where the evidence shows the material was segregated into reusable and meltable forms and the price difference reflects quality and end use. Alleged substitution must be proved by reliable evidence linking the goods received to some other procurement; uncorroborated statements or a mismatch in nomenclature are insufficient. Credit also cannot be denied at the recipient&#039;s end simply because of the supplier&#039;s duty adjustment. On these principles, the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the grant of credit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256556</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>