<?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>2001 (9) TMI 135 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50647</link>
    <description>Interest under Section 11AB and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act are not attracted unless the evidence establishes wilful suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. On the facts discussed, the non-passing on of part of an ATW discount was linked to delayed reconciliation of accounts across sales offices and distribution centres, with discount otherwise being passed on under a uniform credit scheme after payment and reconciliation. As the material accepted by the adjudicating authority did not show deliberate suppression or evasion intent, the commentary concludes that both the interest demand and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:27:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89126" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (9) TMI 135 - CEGAT, COURT NO. I, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50647</link>
      <description>Interest under Section 11AB and penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act are not attracted unless the evidence establishes wilful suppression of facts with intent to evade duty. On the facts discussed, the non-passing on of part of an ATW discount was linked to delayed reconciliation of accounts across sales offices and distribution centres, with discount otherwise being passed on under a uniform credit scheme after payment and reconciliation. As the material accepted by the adjudicating authority did not show deliberate suppression or evasion intent, the commentary concludes that both the interest demand and penalty were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>