<?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>2004 (7) TMI 450 - CESTAT,  KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112355</link>
    <description>Interest demand cannot be sustained where the show-cause notice proposed only recovery of wrongly taken Modvat credit and penalty, and did not propose recovery of duty or interest. The adjudicating and appellate authorities travelled beyond the scope of the notice by ordering interest under the Central Excise Act. As no notice was issued for duty or interest, the demand was held unsustainable and set aside. The penalty was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 17:24:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149371" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (7) TMI 450 - CESTAT,  KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112355</link>
      <description>Interest demand cannot be sustained where the show-cause notice proposed only recovery of wrongly taken Modvat credit and penalty, and did not propose recovery of duty or interest. The adjudicating and appellate authorities travelled beyond the scope of the notice by ordering interest under the Central Excise Act. As no notice was issued for duty or interest, the demand was held unsustainable and set aside. The penalty was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>