<?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 274 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252140</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 requires a show cause notice to allege the specific clause said to have been contravened. Where the notice fails to identify the precise violation, the basis for penalty is absent and the demand cannot be sustained. Prior payment of duty and interest does not cure the defect in the notice for penalty purposes. On that reasoning, penalty was held not exigible and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2014 10:50:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 274 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252140</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 13 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 requires a show cause notice to allege the specific clause said to have been contravened. Where the notice fails to identify the precise violation, the basis for penalty is absent and the demand cannot be sustained. Prior payment of duty and interest does not cure the defect in the notice for penalty purposes. On that reasoning, penalty was held not exigible and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>