<?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 (6) TMI 535 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187999</link>
    <description>The appeal by the Revenue challenging the setting aside of penalties imposed on the respondents for availing Cenvat credit on damaged inputs and claiming insurance was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the respondents had paid the duty liability and interest before the show cause notice, aligning with legal precedent. The penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was set aside, while duty demand and interest recovery were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 11:28:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (6) TMI 535 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187999</link>
      <description>The appeal by the Revenue challenging the setting aside of penalties imposed on the respondents for availing Cenvat credit on damaged inputs and claiming insurance was rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the respondents had paid the duty liability and interest before the show cause notice, aligning with legal precedent. The penalty under Rule 15 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 was set aside, while duty demand and interest recovery were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187999</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>