<?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 530 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114618</link>
    <description>Duty and interest cannot be demanded on excisable goods that were never manufactured or cleared; where the unit had no manufacturing facility and no goods existed, the levy failed. Penalties under Central Excise law also could not be sustained because the paper transactions were found not to involve intent to evade duty. By contrast, Modvat credit taken on invoices without receipt of inputs was not allowable, so the denial of credit was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2024 15:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151617" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (9) TMI 530 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114618</link>
      <description>Duty and interest cannot be demanded on excisable goods that were never manufactured or cleared; where the unit had no manufacturing facility and no goods existed, the levy failed. Penalties under Central Excise law also could not be sustained because the paper transactions were found not to involve intent to evade duty. By contrast, Modvat credit taken on invoices without receipt of inputs was not allowable, so the denial of credit was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114618</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>