<?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 (2) TMI 110 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4501</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the interest demand on excess Cenvat credit availed by the appellant, citing that interest is not payable if the credit was not utilized, in line with a High Court judgment. The Tribunal found the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) failed to provide reasoning for the interest demand, leading to its unsustainability. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant was upheld as unchallenged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43843" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 110 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4501</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the interest demand on excess Cenvat credit availed by the appellant, citing that interest is not payable if the credit was not utilized, in line with a High Court judgment. The Tribunal found the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) failed to provide reasoning for the interest demand, leading to its unsustainability. However, the penalty imposed on the appellant was upheld as unchallenged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4501</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>