<?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>2008 (7) TMI 985 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177281</link>
    <description>Settlement applications remain maintainable under the Central Excise Act where demanded duty has been appropriated but penalty and interest imposed in the same proceeding remain unrecovered. &quot;Case&quot; covers proceedings for levy, assessment and collection of duty, including connected appeals or revisions. Although no further duty collection remained after appropriation of the pre-deposit, penalty and interest are legally distinct from duty and their outstanding recovery keeps the originating excise proceeding pending. Treating the matter as concluded solely because duty was realised adopts an unduly narrow construction. The Settlement Commission&#039;s rejection was erroneous and required reconsideration of the settlement application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2016 14:44:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412171" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 985 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177281</link>
      <description>Settlement applications remain maintainable under the Central Excise Act where demanded duty has been appropriated but penalty and interest imposed in the same proceeding remain unrecovered. &quot;Case&quot; covers proceedings for levy, assessment and collection of duty, including connected appeals or revisions. Although no further duty collection remained after appropriation of the pre-deposit, penalty and interest are legally distinct from duty and their outstanding recovery keeps the originating excise proceeding pending. Treating the matter as concluded solely because duty was realised adopts an unduly narrow construction. The Settlement Commission&#039;s rejection was erroneous and required reconsideration of the settlement application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177281</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>