<?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>2009 (3) TMI 697 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125365</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal to the extent of imposing a penalty of Rs. 5,000 due to a procedural lapse, despite finding the exercise revenue neutral as the duty equivalent to the wrongly availed Cenvat credit had been paid on the final product. The Tribunal acknowledged the procedural infraction and imposed the penalty under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Jul 2017 10:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162283" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (3) TMI 697 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125365</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the Revenue&#039;s appeal to the extent of imposing a penalty of Rs. 5,000 due to a procedural lapse, despite finding the exercise revenue neutral as the duty equivalent to the wrongly availed Cenvat credit had been paid on the final product. The Tribunal acknowledged the procedural infraction and imposed the penalty under Rule 27 of the Central Excise Rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>