<?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>2003 (7) TMI 455 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107875</link>
    <description>Wrong availment of Modvat credit justified imposition of penalty under the provisions invoked in the show cause notice, and the mere reference to additional provisions in the adjudication order did not vitiate the penalty once the default was otherwise established. The penalty therefore remained sustainable in principle. However, voluntary debit of the credit and the surrounding facts warranted interference with the quantum, so the penalty was reduced to Rs. 5,000 while the rest of the order was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Mar 2012 14:33:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144892" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 455 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107875</link>
      <description>Wrong availment of Modvat credit justified imposition of penalty under the provisions invoked in the show cause notice, and the mere reference to additional provisions in the adjudication order did not vitiate the penalty once the default was otherwise established. The penalty therefore remained sustainable in principle. However, voluntary debit of the credit and the surrounding facts warranted interference with the quantum, so the penalty was reduced to Rs. 5,000 while the rest of the order was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107875</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>