<?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>2005 (12) TMI 361 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117156</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld duty demands, denial of Modvat credit, and penalties on the appellant for deliberate evasion of Central Excise duty due to discrepancies in stock taking and clearance of consignments under the same invoice. The tribunal reinstated duty and Modvat demands, justifying penalties imposed on the appellant and rejecting appeals seeking reduction or setting aside of penalties. The authorized representative&#039;s plea for penalty dismissal was upheld as he was not directly involved in the evasion. Both parties&#039; appeals were decided based on evidence of duty evasion and upheld penalties for deliberate evasion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2012 16:37:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 361 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117156</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld duty demands, denial of Modvat credit, and penalties on the appellant for deliberate evasion of Central Excise duty due to discrepancies in stock taking and clearance of consignments under the same invoice. The tribunal reinstated duty and Modvat demands, justifying penalties imposed on the appellant and rejecting appeals seeking reduction or setting aside of penalties. The authorized representative&#039;s plea for penalty dismissal was upheld as he was not directly involved in the evasion. Both parties&#039; appeals were decided based on evidence of duty evasion and upheld penalties for deliberate evasion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>