<?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>2018 (1) TMI 420 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353684</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, partially allowed the Assessee&#039;s appeal, and set aside the penalty in a case involving Cenvat Credit on Input Service Advertisement and Publicity used on traded goods. The Tribunal held that the demand for Cenvat Credit duty for the normal period of limitation was applicable, emphasizing the absence of intent to evade payment of duty. The judgment, delivered on 03.01.2018, highlighted the interpretation of the Act and Rules in the matter.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:20:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503798" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 420 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353684</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, partially allowed the Assessee&#039;s appeal, and set aside the penalty in a case involving Cenvat Credit on Input Service Advertisement and Publicity used on traded goods. The Tribunal held that the demand for Cenvat Credit duty for the normal period of limitation was applicable, emphasizing the absence of intent to evade payment of duty. The judgment, delivered on 03.01.2018, highlighted the interpretation of the Act and Rules in the matter.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353684</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>