<?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>2007 (8) TMI 108 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2553</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on inputs was held admissible once the product was found dutiable, because procedural objections such as prior declaration and account maintenance could not by themselves defeat the substantive entitlement. The finding of alleged misdeclaration did not govern the separate issue of credit eligibility. The claim was, however, made conditional on proof that the inputs were duty-paid, and the matter was remanded for limited verification of supporting documents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 108 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2553</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on inputs was held admissible once the product was found dutiable, because procedural objections such as prior declaration and account maintenance could not by themselves defeat the substantive entitlement. The finding of alleged misdeclaration did not govern the separate issue of credit eligibility. The claim was, however, made conditional on proof that the inputs were duty-paid, and the matter was remanded for limited verification of supporting documents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2553</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>