<?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>2022 (12) TMI 973 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431856</link>
    <description>Cenvat credit on supplementary invoices may be denied only where the supplier&#039;s differential duty is recoverable because of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or a similar evasion-related contravention established in the supplier&#039;s proceedings. Where the supplier&#039;s show cause notice did not invoke the extended period or propose penalty for such conduct, and the adjudication under Section 11A(2) did not record the necessary foundational allegation, the recipient-side authority cannot independently treat the differential duty as arising from evasion. On that basis, credit on the supplementary invoices was held admissible and the associated duty, interest, and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2022 09:18:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=699496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 973 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431856</link>
      <description>Cenvat credit on supplementary invoices may be denied only where the supplier&#039;s differential duty is recoverable because of fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or a similar evasion-related contravention established in the supplier&#039;s proceedings. Where the supplier&#039;s show cause notice did not invoke the extended period or propose penalty for such conduct, and the adjudication under Section 11A(2) did not record the necessary foundational allegation, the recipient-side authority cannot independently treat the differential duty as arising from evasion. On that basis, credit on the supplementary invoices was held admissible and the associated duty, interest, and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431856</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>