<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1263 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347205</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit cannot be denied to a buyer solely because the supplier failed to discharge duty where the goods were received under valid duty-paying invoices, the invoice value was paid, and the transaction was bona fide. The analysis distinguishes cases involving bogus invoices or absence of genuine receipt, and relies on the Board&#039;s circular and supporting precedent to confirm that consignee-side credit should not be reversed on supplier default alone. The assessee&#039;s credit entitlement was therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=487527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1263 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347205</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit cannot be denied to a buyer solely because the supplier failed to discharge duty where the goods were received under valid duty-paying invoices, the invoice value was paid, and the transaction was bona fide. The analysis distinguishes cases involving bogus invoices or absence of genuine receipt, and relies on the Board&#039;s circular and supporting precedent to confirm that consignee-side credit should not be reversed on supplier default alone. The assessee&#039;s credit entitlement was therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347205</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>