<?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>2006 (9) TMI 367 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119966</link>
    <description>Modvat credit on transformer oil used in repairing transformers cleared without payment of duty was held inadmissible, so reversal of the credit was upheld. Penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside because the order did not invoke the specific sub-clause attracted by the alleged conduct, which was required to sustain penal liability. Penalty under Section 11AC was reduced because the records showed regular filing of returns and disclosure of material facts, indicating a misinterpretation of Modvat provisions rather than deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. The duty demand was maintained, but the penalty regime was partially relieved in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jul 2012 13:18:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 367 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119966</link>
      <description>Modvat credit on transformer oil used in repairing transformers cleared without payment of duty was held inadmissible, so reversal of the credit was upheld. Penalty under Rule 173Q was set aside because the order did not invoke the specific sub-clause attracted by the alleged conduct, which was required to sustain penal liability. Penalty under Section 11AC was reduced because the records showed regular filing of returns and disclosure of material facts, indicating a misinterpretation of Modvat provisions rather than deliberate suppression with intent to evade duty. The duty demand was maintained, but the penalty regime was partially relieved in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>