<?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 (11) TMI 812 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370469</link>
    <description>Trade discount remained an allowable deduction during the relevant period, but duty, interest and penalty were sustained where the assessee claimed discount in invoices without passing it on to customers, because the proviso to Section 11A was attracted and the consequential levy under Sections 11AB and 11AC followed. A separate penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained once penalty under Section 11AC had already been imposed for the same default, as Rule 173Q was expressly subject to Section 11AC. The result was that the excise demand and Section 11AC penalty were upheld, while the additional Rule 173Q penalty was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:36:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542483" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 812 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370469</link>
      <description>Trade discount remained an allowable deduction during the relevant period, but duty, interest and penalty were sustained where the assessee claimed discount in invoices without passing it on to customers, because the proviso to Section 11A was attracted and the consequential levy under Sections 11AB and 11AC followed. A separate penalty under Rule 173Q could not be sustained once penalty under Section 11AC had already been imposed for the same default, as Rule 173Q was expressly subject to Section 11AC. The result was that the excise demand and Section 11AC penalty were upheld, while the additional Rule 173Q penalty was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370469</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>