<?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 617 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124067</link>
    <description>Excess Cenvat credit taken under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was treated as a bona fide mistake where the appellant reversed the excess promptly after the audit objection and paid interest. Because the credit was not retained and the conduct did not indicate fraudulent availment, separate penal action under Rule 13(1) was considered unwarranted. The penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 11:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 617 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124067</link>
      <description>Excess Cenvat credit taken under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 was treated as a bona fide mistake where the appellant reversed the excess promptly after the audit objection and paid interest. Because the credit was not retained and the conduct did not indicate fraudulent availment, separate penal action under Rule 13(1) was considered unwarranted. The penalty was therefore set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124067</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>