<?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>2004 (8) TMI 582 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201462</link>
    <description>Wrongly utilized Modvat credit was recoverable where shortage of inputs was admitted, the notice substantially covered shortage and wrongful credit availment, and the assessee had partly debited and partly deposited the amount; the duty demand was therefore sustained. Penalty under Rule 173Q was not sustainable because, on the facts, the penalty was attributable to Rule 57I and had been imposed under an inapplicable provision; the deletion of penalty was accordingly maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 09 Jan 2011 19:50:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 582 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201462</link>
      <description>Wrongly utilized Modvat credit was recoverable where shortage of inputs was admitted, the notice substantially covered shortage and wrongful credit availment, and the assessee had partly debited and partly deposited the amount; the duty demand was therefore sustained. Penalty under Rule 173Q was not sustainable because, on the facts, the penalty was attributable to Rule 57I and had been imposed under an inapplicable provision; the deletion of penalty was accordingly maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201462</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>