<?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>2007 (7) TMI 63 -  CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2204</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s classification of repacking imported watches with MRP stickers as &#039;manufacture&#039; for excise duty purposes. It allowed the assessee to pay the duty using CENVAT credit, exceeding the demanded amount, due to the absence of intent to evade duty. The Tribunal found demanding excise duty on MRP basis for repacked watches already cleared on the same basis unjustified. It set aside the penalty, emphasizing the fair resolution achieved by utilizing available credit for duty payment. The appeal concluded with the modified order sustaining the demand but removing the penalty for a just outcome.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 16:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41576" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 63 -  CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2204</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s classification of repacking imported watches with MRP stickers as &#039;manufacture&#039; for excise duty purposes. It allowed the assessee to pay the duty using CENVAT credit, exceeding the demanded amount, due to the absence of intent to evade duty. The Tribunal found demanding excise duty on MRP basis for repacked watches already cleared on the same basis unjustified. It set aside the penalty, emphasizing the fair resolution achieved by utilizing available credit for duty payment. The appeal concluded with the modified order sustaining the demand but removing the penalty for a just outcome.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2204</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>