<?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 (9) TMI 281 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332020</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the interest and penalty imposed on the appellant for utilizing credit of AED (Textile &amp;amp; Textile Articles) towards payment of AED (Goods of Special Importance) without a show-cause notice for duty demand. The Tribunal clarified that interest could be demanded even if duty had been paid, as per Section 11AB(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, emphasizing the absence of a 37B order for duty payment in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 11:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 281 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332020</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the interest and penalty imposed on the appellant for utilizing credit of AED (Textile &amp;amp; Textile Articles) towards payment of AED (Goods of Special Importance) without a show-cause notice for duty demand. The Tribunal clarified that interest could be demanded even if duty had been paid, as per Section 11AB(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, emphasizing the absence of a 37B order for duty payment in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332020</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>