<?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>2024 (8) TMI 1328 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757624</link>
    <description>Job-work manufacture of a distinct excisable product entitled the assessee to have eligible CENVAT credit on duty-paid inputs considered at the stage of quantification, subject to verification of supporting documents and compliance with credit rules. Suppression of the job-work activity from returns, inconsistent descriptions of the work, and non-disclosure until audit objection were treated as suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period. On that footing, the penalty and confiscation framework survived, but the quantum of penalties was reduced. Eligibility for refund of service tax paid on the same activity was also recognized in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2024 10:46:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765809" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1328 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757624</link>
      <description>Job-work manufacture of a distinct excisable product entitled the assessee to have eligible CENVAT credit on duty-paid inputs considered at the stage of quantification, subject to verification of supporting documents and compliance with credit rules. Suppression of the job-work activity from returns, inconsistent descriptions of the work, and non-disclosure until audit objection were treated as suppression of facts with intent to evade duty, justifying invocation of the extended limitation period. On that footing, the penalty and confiscation framework survived, but the quantum of penalties was reduced. Eligibility for refund of service tax paid on the same activity was also recognized in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757624</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>