<?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>2023 (4) TMI 603 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436577</link>
    <description>The appeal filed by the Appellant challenging the demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty based on supplementary invoices was rejected. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision to demand central excise duty along with interest of Rs. 61,408 was upheld. The Member (Technical) referred to established legal principles and precedents, including the Supreme Court&#039;s decision in SAIL Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, emphasizing that duty is payable at the time of removal, and interest is calculated from that date. The Appellant&#039;s argument regarding interest payment on subsequently paid duty due to price variation was dismissed, as it was settled in favor of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Apr 2023 08:05:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710870" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 603 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436577</link>
      <description>The appeal filed by the Appellant challenging the demand for central excise duty, interest, and penalty based on supplementary invoices was rejected. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision to demand central excise duty along with interest of Rs. 61,408 was upheld. The Member (Technical) referred to established legal principles and precedents, including the Supreme Court&#039;s decision in SAIL Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, emphasizing that duty is payable at the time of removal, and interest is calculated from that date. The Appellant&#039;s argument regarding interest payment on subsequently paid duty due to price variation was dismissed, as it was settled in favor of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>