<?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 (9) TMI 513 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114507</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld a penalty of Rs. 10,000 on the appellants for issuing modvatable invoices illegally in excisable goods trading. Despite the appellants&#039; argument that the goods were purchased under transit sale, it was established they were bought from a non-registered dealer, not the manufacturer. The Tribunal found the appellants guilty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules for issuing modvatable documents illegally. The decision emphasized the appellants were not direct purchasers from the manufacturer due to the intermediary involved. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty imposed for violating Central Excise Rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 12:58:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 513 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114507</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld a penalty of Rs. 10,000 on the appellants for issuing modvatable invoices illegally in excisable goods trading. Despite the appellants&#039; argument that the goods were purchased under transit sale, it was established they were bought from a non-registered dealer, not the manufacturer. The Tribunal found the appellants guilty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules for issuing modvatable documents illegally. The decision emphasized the appellants were not direct purchasers from the manufacturer due to the intermediary involved. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the penalty imposed for violating Central Excise Rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114507</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>