<?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 (5) TMI 275 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342537</link>
    <description>The appeal by M/s Padma Flashlights Pvt Ltd challenging the disallowance of CENVAT credit was successful. The court found that there was no deliberate attempt to claim ineligible credit, as the disputed amounts were promptly reversed upon audit. The court noted that the show cause notice and lower authorities failed to establish deliberate intent, leading to the conclusion that penalties were unjustified. Therefore, the penalties imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 May 2017 10:35:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=467725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (5) TMI 275 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342537</link>
      <description>The appeal by M/s Padma Flashlights Pvt Ltd challenging the disallowance of CENVAT credit was successful. The court found that there was no deliberate attempt to claim ineligible credit, as the disputed amounts were promptly reversed upon audit. The court noted that the show cause notice and lower authorities failed to establish deliberate intent, leading to the conclusion that penalties were unjustified. Therefore, the penalties imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342537</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>