<?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>2005 (8) TMI 218 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54518</link>
    <description>A clerical error in duty-paid documents does not defeat Modvat credit or refund where the inputs were actually received and consumed in the factory and there is no dispute about use or mala fides. The consignee place was wrongly stated, but the record established receipt at the correct unit and utilisation in manufacture, making the defect purely procedural. On that basis, denial of credit/refund was unjustified and the assessee&#039;s claim was admissible.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:06:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 218 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54518</link>
      <description>A clerical error in duty-paid documents does not defeat Modvat credit or refund where the inputs were actually received and consumed in the factory and there is no dispute about use or mala fides. The consignee place was wrongly stated, but the record established receipt at the correct unit and utilisation in manufacture, making the defect purely procedural. On that basis, denial of credit/refund was unjustified and the assessee&#039;s claim was admissible.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54518</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>