<?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>2010 (1) TMI 116 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75745</link>
    <description>Entitlement to Modvat credit, the justification for duty demand and penalties in light of the appellants&#039; stand on Section 11A, and the effect of related orders being set aside were all remitted for de novo consideration. The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and held that these issues had not been finally adjudicated, so the Tribunal must re-examine entitlement to credit and the sustainability of demands and penalties on the existing record and in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 116 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75745</link>
      <description>Entitlement to Modvat credit, the justification for duty demand and penalties in light of the appellants&#039; stand on Section 11A, and the effect of related orders being set aside were all remitted for de novo consideration. The Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and held that these issues had not been finally adjudicated, so the Tribunal must re-examine entitlement to credit and the sustainability of demands and penalties on the existing record and in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75745</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>