<?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 (10) TMI 955 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368989</link>
    <description>An assessee manufacturing exempted Chloroquin Phosphate Tablets was not required to pay 8% of the value of the exempted goods under Rule 57CC(1) where it maintained separate records for inputs and asserted that no credit had been taken on inputs used for the exempt product. The absence of authenticated records was not held against the assessee because the records had been taken over by the department and later could not be traced despite efforts. On the evidence, the assessee was given the benefit of doubt on maintenance of separate accounts, the demand was held unsustainable, and the penalty issue did not survive. The assessee&#039;s appeal succeeded and the revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=538715" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 955 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368989</link>
      <description>An assessee manufacturing exempted Chloroquin Phosphate Tablets was not required to pay 8% of the value of the exempted goods under Rule 57CC(1) where it maintained separate records for inputs and asserted that no credit had been taken on inputs used for the exempt product. The absence of authenticated records was not held against the assessee because the records had been taken over by the department and later could not be traced despite efforts. On the evidence, the assessee was given the benefit of doubt on maintenance of separate accounts, the demand was held unsustainable, and the penalty issue did not survive. The assessee&#039;s appeal succeeded and the revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>