<?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>2016 (4) TMI 541 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326427</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority for the respondents to establish the receipt of goods as per Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Penalties imposed under Rule 15 were set aside for individuals not directly availing the credit, aligning with the legal interpretation that penalties under such rules apply only to the manufacturer availing the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2016 10:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=423873" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 541 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326427</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case to the original adjudicating authority for the respondents to establish the receipt of goods as per Rule 9(5) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. Penalties imposed under Rule 15 were set aside for individuals not directly availing the credit, aligning with the legal interpretation that penalties under such rules apply only to the manufacturer availing the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326427</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>