<?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>2006 (11) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47952</link>
    <description>Modvat credit cannot be denied solely because a dealer&#039;s invoice was issued from a premises other than the registered premises, where duty payment, receipt of inputs, and their use in the final product are established. The Tribunal treated these factual requirements as proved, and the Board&#039;s circular read with the amendment to Rule 57G reflected that credit should not fail for absence of every documentary detail if the substantive conditions are verifiable. On that basis, the objection based only on the place of invoice issuance was untenable and the credit was properly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:51:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 213 - HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47952</link>
      <description>Modvat credit cannot be denied solely because a dealer&#039;s invoice was issued from a premises other than the registered premises, where duty payment, receipt of inputs, and their use in the final product are established. The Tribunal treated these factual requirements as proved, and the Board&#039;s circular read with the amendment to Rule 57G reflected that credit should not fail for absence of every documentary detail if the substantive conditions are verifiable. On that basis, the objection based only on the place of invoice issuance was untenable and the credit was properly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47952</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>