<?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>2011 (7) TMI 437 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207672</link>
    <description>Contemporaneous statements and seizure-linked recoveries were treated as a coherent chain of evidence showing diversion of duty-paid CP 172 SG resin, so Cenvat credit and interest were sustained only to the extent of the quantity proved diverted, with fresh quantification ordered for the balance. Penalty under Rule 26 was set aside for a director against whom no direct material showed knowing involvement in goods liable to confiscation. Penalties on other noticees were largely upheld, though one penalty was reduced and the duty-related penalty on the main noticee was remanded for recomputation on the diverted quantity finally determined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 437 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207672</link>
      <description>Contemporaneous statements and seizure-linked recoveries were treated as a coherent chain of evidence showing diversion of duty-paid CP 172 SG resin, so Cenvat credit and interest were sustained only to the extent of the quantity proved diverted, with fresh quantification ordered for the balance. Penalty under Rule 26 was set aside for a director against whom no direct material showed knowing involvement in goods liable to confiscation. Penalties on other noticees were largely upheld, though one penalty was reduced and the duty-related penalty on the main noticee was remanded for recomputation on the diverted quantity finally determined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207672</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>