<?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 (12) TMI 1209 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447525</link>
    <description>The Customs Excise &amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal upheld the common adjudication order dated 28 February 2001, dismissing the appeals of the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant failed to justify the price discrepancy in scrap sales and imposed penalties for improperly passing on Modvat Credit. The HC further dismissed the appeal, finding no legal questions warranting interference, thus affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision and the penalties imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2023 07:57:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=738016" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 1209 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447525</link>
      <description>The Customs Excise &amp; Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal upheld the common adjudication order dated 28 February 2001, dismissing the appeals of the appellant. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant failed to justify the price discrepancy in scrap sales and imposed penalties for improperly passing on Modvat Credit. The HC further dismissed the appeal, finding no legal questions warranting interference, thus affirming the Tribunal&#039;s decision and the penalties imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>