<?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 112 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2560</link>
    <description>Modvat credit was held admissible where the input credit was initially taken within the six-month period from the invoice date, but the amount was later corrected to reflect the full duty through rectification of an inadvertent clerical error. The later correction did not constitute a fresh taking of credit, so the time spent in correcting the entry could not be counted against the limitation under Rule 57G(5). The rectified entry was treated as relating back to the original timely credit, and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 09:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41919" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 112 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2560</link>
      <description>Modvat credit was held admissible where the input credit was initially taken within the six-month period from the invoice date, but the amount was later corrected to reflect the full duty through rectification of an inadvertent clerical error. The later correction did not constitute a fresh taking of credit, so the time spent in correcting the entry could not be counted against the limitation under Rule 57G(5). The rectified entry was treated as relating back to the original timely credit, and the departmental challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>