<?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 (1) TMI 93 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3526</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision allowing respondents to avail Modvat credit based on an endorsed Bill of Entry. The duty paid character of goods and their utilization were key factors, outweighing technical objections about partial sale. The judgment emphasizes substantive compliance over procedural technicalities in claiming Modvat credit, affirming that an endorsed Bill of Entry remains valid for this purpose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 93 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3526</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision allowing respondents to avail Modvat credit based on an endorsed Bill of Entry. The duty paid character of goods and their utilization were key factors, outweighing technical objections about partial sale. The judgment emphasizes substantive compliance over procedural technicalities in claiming Modvat credit, affirming that an endorsed Bill of Entry remains valid for this purpose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3526</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>