<?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 (8) TMI 559 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122751</link>
    <description>Interest for delayed excise duty payment under Rule 173G(1)(d) had to be calculated on the outstanding duty amount itself, because the rule was held to require payment of unpaid duty together with interest until actual payment. The appellant could not reduce the interest base by taking Cenvat credit into account, so the additional interest demand was sustained. On penalty, the authority exercised discretion on the facts and reduced the penalty from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 50,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2012 18:57:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=159736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 559 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122751</link>
      <description>Interest for delayed excise duty payment under Rule 173G(1)(d) had to be calculated on the outstanding duty amount itself, because the rule was held to require payment of unpaid duty together with interest until actual payment. The appellant could not reduce the interest base by taking Cenvat credit into account, so the additional interest demand was sustained. On penalty, the authority exercised discretion on the facts and reduced the penalty from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 50,000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>