<?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 (10) TMI 3 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217048</link>
    <description>The Tribunal reinstated the Cenvat credit demand, set aside the interest and penalty imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals), and reduced the penalty amount under Rule 15(1) to Rs. 20,000. The Tribunal held that mens rea is not required to impose penalty under Rule 15(1) for wrong availment of Cenvat credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2013 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 3 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217048</link>
      <description>The Tribunal reinstated the Cenvat credit demand, set aside the interest and penalty imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals), and reduced the penalty amount under Rule 15(1) to Rs. 20,000. The Tribunal held that mens rea is not required to impose penalty under Rule 15(1) for wrong availment of Cenvat credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>