<?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 744 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245296</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the cenvat credit reversal, demand of interest, and penalty equal to the cenvat credit. The Tribunal considered the timing of the Supreme Court&#039;s decision on interest payment for unutilized credit and the prevailing understanding during the relevant period. The appellant&#039;s argument on the limitation ground was deemed meritorious, leading to the waiver of pre-deposit and stay on recovery during the appeal&#039;s pendency. The penalty imposition was questioned due to the lack of clarity and prevailing views during the relevant period regarding interest payment on unutilized credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2014 08:06:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 744 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245296</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the cenvat credit reversal, demand of interest, and penalty equal to the cenvat credit. The Tribunal considered the timing of the Supreme Court&#039;s decision on interest payment for unutilized credit and the prevailing understanding during the relevant period. The appellant&#039;s argument on the limitation ground was deemed meritorious, leading to the waiver of pre-deposit and stay on recovery during the appeal&#039;s pendency. The penalty imposition was questioned due to the lack of clarity and prevailing views during the relevant period regarding interest payment on unutilized credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245296</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>