TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Petitioner challenges Excise Authorities' duty, interest, penalty imposition. Rules 96ZO, 96ZP, 96ZQ struck down. Interest, penalty claims unsustainable.</h1> <h3>M/s. CONCAST ISPAT LIMITED & ANR. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ORS.</h3> The petitioner challenged duty, interest, and penalty imposed by Excise Authorities. Rules 96ZO, 96ZP, and 96ZQ of Central Excise Rules, 1944 were struck ... Imposition of duty, interest and penalty - Rules 96ZO, 96ZP and 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 - reliance placed on the decision of M/s. Shree Bhagwati Steel Rolling Mills Versus Commissioner of Central Excise & Another [2015 (11) TMI 1172 - SUPREME COURT] where it was held that the provisions of Rules 96ZO, 96ZP and 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were struck down. - The claim of the Central Excise Authorities for interest and penalty are on the basis of such rules. Consequent to such rules being struck down, the claim on account of interest and penalty are not sustainable - petition disposed off. The petitioner challenged duty, interest, and penalty imposed by Excise Authorities. Rules 96ZO, 96ZP, and 96ZQ of Central Excise Rules, 1944 were struck down. Claims for interest and penalty not sustainable. Petitioners can move Tribunal for duty imposition. Case disposed of, no costs awarded.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
