<?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>2012 (2) TMI 288 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210817</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, stating that they had complied with the required procedures for reversing the proportionate credit on inputs and input services for the exempted product. The demand for 10% of the value of the exempted goods was deemed unwarranted, and the appellants were granted a stay on the collection of dues pending the appeal. The Tribunal did not address the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC, focusing solely on the compliance issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184245" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (2) TMI 288 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210817</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellants, stating that they had complied with the required procedures for reversing the proportionate credit on inputs and input services for the exempted product. The demand for 10% of the value of the exempted goods was deemed unwarranted, and the appellants were granted a stay on the collection of dues pending the appeal. The Tribunal did not address the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC, focusing solely on the compliance issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210817</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>