<?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 (12) TMI 602 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352333</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the main appellant&#039;s appeal, upholding the duty demand and penalty while setting aside the penalty imposed on the second appellant. Directions were given for verifying cenvat credit eligibility and re-quantifying duty liability based on documentary evidence. The main appellant was required to discharge Central Excise duty, with the Tribunal emphasizing the importance of meeting exemption conditions to avoid liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:26:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499515" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 602 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352333</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the main appellant&#039;s appeal, upholding the duty demand and penalty while setting aside the penalty imposed on the second appellant. Directions were given for verifying cenvat credit eligibility and re-quantifying duty liability based on documentary evidence. The main appellant was required to discharge Central Excise duty, with the Tribunal emphasizing the importance of meeting exemption conditions to avoid liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352333</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>