<?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 (10) TMI 272 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252138</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit wrongly availed on inputs cleared as such remains liable to interest from the date of clearance, because the credit becomes reversible when the inputs leave the factory without use in manufacture. Reversal only at month-end does not cure the wrongful availment or remove the burden for the period during which the credit was retained. The Tribunal treated the intervening deprivation of duty as sufficient to sustain interest, and upheld the demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2014 10:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366685" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 272 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252138</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit wrongly availed on inputs cleared as such remains liable to interest from the date of clearance, because the credit becomes reversible when the inputs leave the factory without use in manufacture. Reversal only at month-end does not cure the wrongful availment or remove the burden for the period during which the credit was retained. The Tribunal treated the intervening deprivation of duty as sufficient to sustain interest, and upheld the demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>