<?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>1999 (12) TMI 85 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48603</link>
    <description>For rebate claims on exports under bond, Rule 52A and the applicable circulars governed which invoice copy had to be produced. The scheme contemplated different invoice copies for different purposes, and the Board&#039;s 30-5-1995 circular treated the quadruplicate invoice as the copy for scrutiny in rebate matters. The 29-5-1995 circular concerned rebate under a different export-on-payment-of-duty provision and did not justify insisting on a duplicate invoice here. The rebate authority could require the quadruplicate invoice from the fabric manufacturer or the original invoice from the job worker, and rebate could not be denied merely for non-production of the duplicate copy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:06:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (12) TMI 85 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48603</link>
      <description>For rebate claims on exports under bond, Rule 52A and the applicable circulars governed which invoice copy had to be produced. The scheme contemplated different invoice copies for different purposes, and the Board&#039;s 30-5-1995 circular treated the quadruplicate invoice as the copy for scrutiny in rebate matters. The 29-5-1995 circular concerned rebate under a different export-on-payment-of-duty provision and did not justify insisting on a duplicate invoice here. The rebate authority could require the quadruplicate invoice from the fabric manufacturer or the original invoice from the job worker, and rebate could not be denied merely for non-production of the duplicate copy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>