<?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 (9) TMI 484 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366748</link>
    <description>An amended exemption notification issued to remove difficulty in complying with an earlier certification condition was treated as clarificatory and beneficial in nature, so it applied retrospectively. The earlier notification required production of a certificate before clearance of goods, but the later amendment shifted the certification and undertaking procedure to address practical compliance issues. On that basis, the assessee was held entitled to exemption under the amended notification. Because the appeal on merits succeeded, the penalty imposed on the Director under Rule 26 also could not survive and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Sep 2018 08:09:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533783" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 484 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366748</link>
      <description>An amended exemption notification issued to remove difficulty in complying with an earlier certification condition was treated as clarificatory and beneficial in nature, so it applied retrospectively. The earlier notification required production of a certificate before clearance of goods, but the later amendment shifted the certification and undertaking procedure to address practical compliance issues. On that basis, the assessee was held entitled to exemption under the amended notification. Because the appeal on merits succeeded, the penalty imposed on the Director under Rule 26 also could not survive and was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>