<?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>2008 (4) TMI 607 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123791</link>
    <description>Voluntary reversal of Cenvat credit on audit detection did not bar the duty demand on limitation grounds, because the amount was appropriated and no refund claim was made. However, penalty and interest were set aside since the record did not establish suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The operative effect is that the duty demand was sustained, while penal consequences were denied for lack of deliberate evasion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:40:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160751" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 607 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123791</link>
      <description>Voluntary reversal of Cenvat credit on audit detection did not bar the duty demand on limitation grounds, because the amount was appropriated and no refund claim was made. However, penalty and interest were set aside since the record did not establish suppression of facts or intent to evade duty. The operative effect is that the duty demand was sustained, while penal consequences were denied for lack of deliberate evasion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123791</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>