<?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>2017 (2) TMI 250 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338550</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit attributable to inputs used in manufacturing goods that later became wholly exempt from Central Excise duty was held recoverable, because the credit scheme operates only where the final product bears duty and credit is not admissible for exempted goods. The Tribunal accepted that the applicable rules expressly supported reversal of wrongly utilised credit and distinguished earlier decisions based on the absence of a specific reversal provision. On penalty, it found the surrounding circumstances insufficient to justify penal action and set the penalty aside. The credit demand was therefore sustained, while the assessee obtained relief only on penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Mar 2017 12:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=457730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 250 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338550</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit attributable to inputs used in manufacturing goods that later became wholly exempt from Central Excise duty was held recoverable, because the credit scheme operates only where the final product bears duty and credit is not admissible for exempted goods. The Tribunal accepted that the applicable rules expressly supported reversal of wrongly utilised credit and distinguished earlier decisions based on the absence of a specific reversal provision. On penalty, it found the surrounding circumstances insufficient to justify penal action and set the penalty aside. The credit demand was therefore sustained, while the assessee obtained relief only on penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>