<?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>2005 (12) TMI 37 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=700</link>
    <description>Modvat credit could not be denied on a purely technical objection where the assessee took credit on original invoices after the duplicate copies were lost in transit, provided the competent authority was satisfied that the inputs were duty paid, received in the factory, and used in manufacture. The court read the procedural invoice requirement with the beneficial exception allowing credit on originals in such circumstances, and held that a rigid construction would defeat genuine credit claims and the anti-fraud purpose of the rule. On the facts, the substantive conditions were undisputed, so the credit was admissible and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 May 2017 11:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 37 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=700</link>
      <description>Modvat credit could not be denied on a purely technical objection where the assessee took credit on original invoices after the duplicate copies were lost in transit, provided the competent authority was satisfied that the inputs were duty paid, received in the factory, and used in manufacture. The court read the procedural invoice requirement with the beneficial exception allowing credit on originals in such circumstances, and held that a rigid construction would defeat genuine credit claims and the anti-fraud purpose of the rule. On the facts, the substantive conditions were undisputed, so the credit was admissible and the revenue challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>