<?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 (8) TMI 1023 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331639</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants for non-filing of the Annual Return under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It held that the penalty under Rule 15 was not applicable as it was a procedural violation, and Rule 9 did not provide for penal provisions for such non-compliance. The lower authorities erred in applying incorrect legal provisions, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2016 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439439" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1023 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331639</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants for non-filing of the Annual Return under the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. It held that the penalty under Rule 15 was not applicable as it was a procedural violation, and Rule 9 did not provide for penal provisions for such non-compliance. The lower authorities erred in applying incorrect legal provisions, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331639</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>