<?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>2007 (7) TMI 488 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122633</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the penalty imposed for wrongly availing deemed credit on bed sheets as inputs. The appellants were found not liable for penalty as they were not engaged in any manufacturing process related to the bed sheets, despite having paid duty at a higher value. The demand was confirmed, but the penalty was set aside based on the lack of manufacturing activity by the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2012 11:22:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 488 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122633</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant regarding the penalty imposed for wrongly availing deemed credit on bed sheets as inputs. The appellants were found not liable for penalty as they were not engaged in any manufacturing process related to the bed sheets, despite having paid duty at a higher value. The demand was confirmed, but the penalty was set aside based on the lack of manufacturing activity by the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122633</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>