<?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 (2) TMI 596 - CESTAT,  KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113356</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted a stay petition in a case involving a duty demand and personal penalty totaling Rs. 23,45,218 for alleged undervaluation of Ingots supplied to a sister unit. The appellant argued for a revenue neutral situation due to Modvat credit availability to the sister unit, asserting no motive for under valuation. The Tribunal agreed, recognizing a revenue neutral situation as the duty demanded would be available as credit to the appellant. The stay petition was allowed unconditionally, emphasizing the importance of establishing revenue neutrality in duty demand cases and considering jurisdictional overlaps.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 18:48:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150362" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (2) TMI 596 - CESTAT,  KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113356</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted a stay petition in a case involving a duty demand and personal penalty totaling Rs. 23,45,218 for alleged undervaluation of Ingots supplied to a sister unit. The appellant argued for a revenue neutral situation due to Modvat credit availability to the sister unit, asserting no motive for under valuation. The Tribunal agreed, recognizing a revenue neutral situation as the duty demanded would be available as credit to the appellant. The stay petition was allowed unconditionally, emphasizing the importance of establishing revenue neutrality in duty demand cases and considering jurisdictional overlaps.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>