<?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 (11) TMI 89 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252772</link>
    <description>Under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, recovery of interest and penalty requires not only wrong availment of credit but its utilisation as well. The Court read the rule in light of the clarificatory amendment using the expression &quot;taken and utilised&quot;, and held that mere taking of CENVAT credit, if reversed before use, does not by itself attract interest or penalty. On that basis, the demand was set aside and the Department&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2015 14:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367976" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 89 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252772</link>
      <description>Under Rule 14 of the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004, recovery of interest and penalty requires not only wrong availment of credit but its utilisation as well. The Court read the rule in light of the clarificatory amendment using the expression &quot;taken and utilised&quot;, and held that mere taking of CENVAT credit, if reversed before use, does not by itself attract interest or penalty. On that basis, the demand was set aside and the Department&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>