<?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 (8) TMI 925 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182422</link>
    <description>An appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law concerning whether Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could be invoked, whether reversal of Cenvat credit before issue of the show cause notice affected liability, and whether penalty could be imposed under Section 11AC and the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/2004. The focus was on the legal basis for demand and penalty in the context of pre-notice credit reversal and the applicable Cenvat regime.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 May 2016 12:08:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=427657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 925 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182422</link>
      <description>An appeal was admitted on substantial questions of law concerning whether Section 11A(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 could be invoked, whether reversal of Cenvat credit before issue of the show cause notice affected liability, and whether penalty could be imposed under Section 11AC and the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002/2004. The focus was on the legal basis for demand and penalty in the context of pre-notice credit reversal and the applicable Cenvat regime.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182422</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>