<?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 (2) TMI 438 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78294</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was inapplicable where the dispute concerned excess Cenvat credit claimed and later reversed under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Section 11AC is directed at short-levy or non-payment of duty with an element of evasion, whereas reversal of excess credit does not by itself satisfy that penalty framework. The penalty set aside by the lower authority was therefore affirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 13:12:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116418" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 438 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78294</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was inapplicable where the dispute concerned excess Cenvat credit claimed and later reversed under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002. Section 11AC is directed at short-levy or non-payment of duty with an element of evasion, whereas reversal of excess credit does not by itself satisfy that penalty framework. The penalty set aside by the lower authority was therefore affirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>