<?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 (1) TMI 706 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125981</link>
    <description>Where monthly central excise duty remains unpaid beyond the due date and the default continues beyond one month, Rule 8(3A) deems the goods cleared without payment of duty and triggers the penalty consequences under the Central Excise Rules, 2002. On that basis, improper removal of excisable goods attracts penalty under Rule 25(1)(a), not merely the residual penalty under Rule 27. The text notes repeated short payment, disclosure only in ER-1 returns, and payment after departmental detection, supporting the conclusion that the appellate authority&#039;s deletion of penalty was unsustainable and the penalty was restored with modification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 09:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162886" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 706 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125981</link>
      <description>Where monthly central excise duty remains unpaid beyond the due date and the default continues beyond one month, Rule 8(3A) deems the goods cleared without payment of duty and triggers the penalty consequences under the Central Excise Rules, 2002. On that basis, improper removal of excisable goods attracts penalty under Rule 25(1)(a), not merely the residual penalty under Rule 27. The text notes repeated short payment, disclosure only in ER-1 returns, and payment after departmental detection, supporting the conclusion that the appellate authority&#039;s deletion of penalty was unsustainable and the penalty was restored with modification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>