<?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 (9) TMI 161 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3252</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the revenue against the dropping of proceedings for recovery of excess Cenvat credit. The respondents were found to have received inputs with excess credit, leading to show cause notices. The Tribunal held that the excess credit was not admissible as the respondents failed to provide evidence of actual duty paid. The demand was upheld without imposing a penalty, differing from previous cases where recovery was sought directly from dealers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42604" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 161 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3252</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the revenue against the dropping of proceedings for recovery of excess Cenvat credit. The respondents were found to have received inputs with excess credit, leading to show cause notices. The Tribunal held that the excess credit was not admissible as the respondents failed to provide evidence of actual duty paid. The demand was upheld without imposing a penalty, differing from previous cases where recovery was sought directly from dealers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>