<?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 1089 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176732</link>
    <description>MODVAT credit was sustained where the denial rested on a wrong factual assumption that credit had been taken before the subsidiary GP-1s were issued, and certified photocopies of subsidiary GP-1s were accepted as sufficient supporting documents. Deemed credit was refused for copper wire under chapter heading 74.08 because the relevant instruction applied only to copper waste and scrap under heading 74.04. Credit on unendorsed GP-1s required verification of receipt, accounting, payment, and use in manufacture, so that matter was remanded for fresh examination. A later GP-1 could not validate credit where no duty paying document existed when the inputs were received.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2015 20:19:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 1089 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176732</link>
      <description>MODVAT credit was sustained where the denial rested on a wrong factual assumption that credit had been taken before the subsidiary GP-1s were issued, and certified photocopies of subsidiary GP-1s were accepted as sufficient supporting documents. Deemed credit was refused for copper wire under chapter heading 74.08 because the relevant instruction applied only to copper waste and scrap under heading 74.04. Credit on unendorsed GP-1s required verification of receipt, accounting, payment, and use in manufacture, so that matter was remanded for fresh examination. A later GP-1 could not validate credit where no duty paying document existed when the inputs were received.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176732</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>