<?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>2003 (10) TMI 225 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52581</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied merely because the dealer&#039;s invoice lacked pre-authentication where the duty-paid character of the goods and their use in manufacture were undisputed. A binding Board circular required credit not to be refused for minor procedural defects in declarations or duty-paying documents unless there was doubt that duty had not been paid or that the goods were not used in manufacture. The circular was applicable to pending matters, and the Tribunal&#039;s earlier approach supported acceptance of the invoice despite the defect. On that basis, the credit was held admissible in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2010 16:19:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 225 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52581</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on capital goods could not be denied merely because the dealer&#039;s invoice lacked pre-authentication where the duty-paid character of the goods and their use in manufacture were undisputed. A binding Board circular required credit not to be refused for minor procedural defects in declarations or duty-paying documents unless there was doubt that duty had not been paid or that the goods were not used in manufacture. The circular was applicable to pending matters, and the Tribunal&#039;s earlier approach supported acceptance of the invoice despite the defect. On that basis, the credit was held admissible in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52581</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>