<?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 (7) TMI 529 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363221</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in a case involving wrongful availment and utilization of CENVAT credit by a two-wheeler manufacturer. The appellant&#039;s practice of availing double credit on the same inputs without proper documentation was deemed illegal. The tribunal upheld the penalty imposed for mala fide intention and suppression of facts, along with the recovery of interest. The extended period of limitation was justified due to the appellant&#039;s failure to disclose relevant information. A remand was ordered for verification of the incorrect quantification of demand, while dismissing the appeal on other grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2018 07:30:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=526333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 529 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363221</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in a case involving wrongful availment and utilization of CENVAT credit by a two-wheeler manufacturer. The appellant&#039;s practice of availing double credit on the same inputs without proper documentation was deemed illegal. The tribunal upheld the penalty imposed for mala fide intention and suppression of facts, along with the recovery of interest. The extended period of limitation was justified due to the appellant&#039;s failure to disclose relevant information. A remand was ordered for verification of the incorrect quantification of demand, while dismissing the appeal on other grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363221</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>