<?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 (4) TMI 1181 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209807</link>
    <description>Entitlement to the benefit of Notification No. 83/90 dated 20.03.1990 was ative for the duty demand on clearance of waste and scrap from a 100% export oriented unit. The Tribunal noted that in earlier proceedings it had already been held that the assessee was covered by the exemption notification, and the impugned demand was only a consequence of the earlier higher-rate assessment. Once the exemption entitlement stood recognised, the foundation for the central excise duty demand and related penalty could not survive. The demand and penalty were therefore held unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1181 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209807</link>
      <description>Entitlement to the benefit of Notification No. 83/90 dated 20.03.1990 was ative for the duty demand on clearance of waste and scrap from a 100% export oriented unit. The Tribunal noted that in earlier proceedings it had already been held that the assessee was covered by the exemption notification, and the impugned demand was only a consequence of the earlier higher-rate assessment. Once the exemption entitlement stood recognised, the foundation for the central excise duty demand and related penalty could not survive. The demand and penalty were therefore held unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209807</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>