<?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>2024 (6) TMI 756 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754149</link>
    <description>Actual production and clearance data, supported by a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate and unrebutted by contrary evidence, prevailed over a notional apportionment method, so duty could not be sustained on a mere estimated basis. Cenvat credit could not be denied only because some invoices were photocopies where receipt and duty payment on inputs were otherwise proved by records and certification. Credit on opening stock of duty paid sugar was admissible because the stock was shown to exist on the relevant date and to have been used in manufacture, despite objections on registration and RG-1 compliance. Sugar cess was also eligible for Cenvat credit as duty of excise, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge on that issue failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2024 13:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 756 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754149</link>
      <description>Actual production and clearance data, supported by a Chartered Accountant&#039;s certificate and unrebutted by contrary evidence, prevailed over a notional apportionment method, so duty could not be sustained on a mere estimated basis. Cenvat credit could not be denied only because some invoices were photocopies where receipt and duty payment on inputs were otherwise proved by records and certification. Credit on opening stock of duty paid sugar was admissible because the stock was shown to exist on the relevant date and to have been used in manufacture, despite objections on registration and RG-1 compliance. Sugar cess was also eligible for Cenvat credit as duty of excise, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge on that issue failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754149</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>