<?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>2019 (4) TMI 1589 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379145</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision, affirming the liability of the appellant, a manufacturer of iron and steel structural material, to pay central excise duty on goods supplied for construction. The appellant&#039;s claim of exemption under specific notifications was rejected as the goods did not meet the criteria for exemption. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s failure to register for Central Excise and pay duties justified the demand for duty, interest, and penalty under Section 11 AC. The appeal was dismissed, and the Commissioner&#039;s order, including the imposed penalty, was upheld without modification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2019 06:16:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=568726" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1589 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379145</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision, affirming the liability of the appellant, a manufacturer of iron and steel structural material, to pay central excise duty on goods supplied for construction. The appellant&#039;s claim of exemption under specific notifications was rejected as the goods did not meet the criteria for exemption. The Tribunal found the appellant&#039;s failure to register for Central Excise and pay duties justified the demand for duty, interest, and penalty under Section 11 AC. The appeal was dismissed, and the Commissioner&#039;s order, including the imposed penalty, was upheld without modification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>