<?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>2008 (5) TMI 216 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31654</link>
    <description>Wrongly availed Cenvat credit reversed before the show cause notice, with no evidence of deliberate or contumacious conduct, did not justify penalty. Interest was also not attracted because the credit was not utilised and no financial accommodation or delayed making good of duty was shown under the provision invoked. The earlier appellate view setting aside both demands was upheld on these facts, and the assessee succeeded on the issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70300" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 216 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31654</link>
      <description>Wrongly availed Cenvat credit reversed before the show cause notice, with no evidence of deliberate or contumacious conduct, did not justify penalty. Interest was also not attracted because the credit was not utilised and no financial accommodation or delayed making good of duty was shown under the provision invoked. The earlier appellate view setting aside both demands was upheld on these facts, and the assessee succeeded on the issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>