<?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>2006 (8) TMI 72 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1100</link>
    <description>Procedural defects in declarations, invoices or prescribed returns do not by themselves defeat Modvat credit where capital goods were received under eligible documents, installed for use in manufacturing dutiable final products, and no sustainable finding of fraudulent availment is established. On that basis, denial of credit was set aside and eligibility to credit was upheld. Because the credit denial could not stand, composite penalties founded on it and the related confiscation order were also unsustainable in their existing form. The matter of consequential penalty liability was remanded for fresh determination after completion of the fraud-related investigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 06:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 72 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1100</link>
      <description>Procedural defects in declarations, invoices or prescribed returns do not by themselves defeat Modvat credit where capital goods were received under eligible documents, installed for use in manufacturing dutiable final products, and no sustainable finding of fraudulent availment is established. On that basis, denial of credit was set aside and eligibility to credit was upheld. Because the credit denial could not stand, composite penalties founded on it and the related confiscation order were also unsustainable in their existing form. The matter of consequential penalty liability was remanded for fresh determination after completion of the fraud-related investigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1100</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>