<?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>2015 (9) TMI 679 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264011</link>
    <description>Section 11D could not be invoked where duty had already been paid from amounts recovered from buyers, so the corresponding interest demand also failed. Cenvat credit on inputs used in exported metalized polyester film did not require reversal where the goods were cleared under the export procedure permitting export without duty. A separate duty demand on polyethylene film captively consumed for lamination was unsustainable because duty on the final product had already discharged the burden. Credit demands based on alleged clandestine removal, and the consequential penalties, also failed once the substantive demands were not established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Jan 2016 16:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397249" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 679 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264011</link>
      <description>Section 11D could not be invoked where duty had already been paid from amounts recovered from buyers, so the corresponding interest demand also failed. Cenvat credit on inputs used in exported metalized polyester film did not require reversal where the goods were cleared under the export procedure permitting export without duty. A separate duty demand on polyethylene film captively consumed for lamination was unsustainable because duty on the final product had already discharged the burden. Credit demands based on alleged clandestine removal, and the consequential penalties, also failed once the substantive demands were not established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264011</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>