<?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>2009 (9) TMI 491 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76808</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the respondents. It found no intention to evade duty, stating that interest was not applicable as there was no delay in payment and the credit was not utilized. The Tribunal cited legal interpretations and previous judgments to support its decision, ultimately holding that there was no suppression of facts or misstatement by the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 491 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76808</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling in favor of the respondents. It found no intention to evade duty, stating that interest was not applicable as there was no delay in payment and the credit was not utilized. The Tribunal cited legal interpretations and previous judgments to support its decision, ultimately holding that there was no suppression of facts or misstatement by the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>