<?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 (3) TMI 130 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257194</link>
    <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the final lot of invoice-covered inputs was received after six months, where the assessee acted on the Superintendent&#039;s direction to receive the goods in smaller lots and store them outside the factory. The restriction was procedural, the arrangement was bona fide, and the departmental trade notice permitted credit in such circumstances when inputs were received at an outside storage place and then brought into the factory in the prescribed manner. On those facts, the six-month stipulation did not justify disallowance of credit, and the question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=377946" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 130 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257194</link>
      <description>Modvat credit could not be denied merely because the final lot of invoice-covered inputs was received after six months, where the assessee acted on the Superintendent&#039;s direction to receive the goods in smaller lots and store them outside the factory. The restriction was procedural, the arrangement was bona fide, and the departmental trade notice permitted credit in such circumstances when inputs were received at an outside storage place and then brought into the factory in the prescribed manner. On those facts, the six-month stipulation did not justify disallowance of credit, and the question of law was answered in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>