<?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>2013 (11) TMI 955 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239778</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals seeking recovery of cenvat credit, interest, and penalties from the respondents. The Department&#039;s claims were based on discrepancies in the destination of goods covered by invoices issued by a registered dealer. Despite citing previous judgments by the Hon&#039;ble Punjab &amp;amp; Haryana High Court, the Tribunal found the evidence, including octroi receipts, insufficient to prove that the goods were not received by the respondents but sent elsewhere. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of conclusive proof and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision setting aside the recovery demands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2013 10:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=336440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 955 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239778</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeals seeking recovery of cenvat credit, interest, and penalties from the respondents. The Department&#039;s claims were based on discrepancies in the destination of goods covered by invoices issued by a registered dealer. Despite citing previous judgments by the Hon&#039;ble Punjab &amp;amp; Haryana High Court, the Tribunal found the evidence, including octroi receipts, insufficient to prove that the goods were not received by the respondents but sent elsewhere. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of conclusive proof and upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039; decision setting aside the recovery demands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239778</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>