<?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>2005 (12) TMI 178 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54839</link>
    <description>Where damaged goods remained within the factory and were capable of repair or possible use in manufacture, reversal of Modvat/Cenvat credit was required only on removal or other final disposition under central excise law; a demand raised before that stage was premature. In the absence of any mala fide on the record, penalty was not justified. The demand could not be sustained at that stage, and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Oct 2010 12:45:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 178 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54839</link>
      <description>Where damaged goods remained within the factory and were capable of repair or possible use in manufacture, reversal of Modvat/Cenvat credit was required only on removal or other final disposition under central excise law; a demand raised before that stage was premature. In the absence of any mala fide on the record, penalty was not justified. The demand could not be sustained at that stage, and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>