<?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>2014 (3) TMI 159 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244703</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the Cenvat Credit demand for the period before 01.04.08 was time-barred. For the period after 01.04.08, the cases were remanded for re-adjudication to determine if sales were on FOR destination basis and identify the &quot;place of removal.&quot; Penalties under Section 11AC were deemed inapplicable due to the interpretative nature of the dispute.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2015 12:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 159 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244703</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the Cenvat Credit demand for the period before 01.04.08 was time-barred. For the period after 01.04.08, the cases were remanded for re-adjudication to determine if sales were on FOR destination basis and identify the &quot;place of removal.&quot; Penalties under Section 11AC were deemed inapplicable due to the interpretative nature of the dispute.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244703</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>