<?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 (9) TMI 503 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108017</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q was held unsustainable where the only lapse was procedural delay in seeking extension of time for receipt of goods. The credit had already been reversed, and the assessee did not dispute the duty liability or entitlement to the reversed credit. In these circumstances, no basis existed for penal action, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 14:01:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145034" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (9) TMI 503 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108017</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q was held unsustainable where the only lapse was procedural delay in seeking extension of time for receipt of goods. The credit had already been reversed, and the assessee did not dispute the duty liability or entitlement to the reversed credit. In these circumstances, no basis existed for penal action, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108017</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>