<?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 (5) TMI 794 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126670</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of interest under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 but set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 15(2) read with Section 11AC of the Act. The judgment emphasized the necessity of meeting specific conditions, such as fraudulent intent, for the imposition of penalties under the relevant provisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:04:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163562" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 794 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126670</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of interest under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 but set aside the penalty imposed under Rule 15(2) read with Section 11AC of the Act. The judgment emphasized the necessity of meeting specific conditions, such as fraudulent intent, for the imposition of penalties under the relevant provisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>