<?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>1997 (4) TMI 230 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88006</link>
    <description>Failure to return original GP 1 documents for defacement, after undertaking to do so, was treated as a breach of the Modvat procedure under Rule 57G(4) and as a basis for penalty under Rule 173Q(bb). The Tribunal noted that penalty must reflect the totality of circumstances and remain proportionate to the lapse, with distinction drawn between technical or venial breaches and deliberate conduct. On that basis, the penalty was sustained in principle but reduced in quantum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2011 13:45:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125072" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (4) TMI 230 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88006</link>
      <description>Failure to return original GP 1 documents for defacement, after undertaking to do so, was treated as a breach of the Modvat procedure under Rule 57G(4) and as a basis for penalty under Rule 173Q(bb). The Tribunal noted that penalty must reflect the totality of circumstances and remain proportionate to the lapse, with distinction drawn between technical or venial breaches and deliberate conduct. On that basis, the penalty was sustained in principle but reduced in quantum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88006</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>