<?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>2010 (8) TMI 209 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201658</link>
    <description>A registered dealer was found to have wrongly passed on Cenvat credit by projecting itself as a first stage dealer despite the goods having already moved through another registered dealer. The Tribunal rejected the plea of bona fide belief, holding that credit could pass only through the prescribed dealer chain and that the appellant should have complied with that restriction. Penalty was therefore justified, though the quantum was reduced on the facts of the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:14:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175260" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 209 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201658</link>
      <description>A registered dealer was found to have wrongly passed on Cenvat credit by projecting itself as a first stage dealer despite the goods having already moved through another registered dealer. The Tribunal rejected the plea of bona fide belief, holding that credit could pass only through the prescribed dealer chain and that the appellant should have complied with that restriction. Penalty was therefore justified, though the quantum was reduced on the facts of the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>