Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2001 (8) TMI 830

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. -  The issue relates to imposition of penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. The appellant took Modvat credit on certain inputs in the month of July, 1995. On knowing that he has wrongly taken the credit, same was reversed before the issue of show cause notice. Arguing for the appellants, Shri Raghu submitted that admittedly the party avai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2001 in the case of Sub Zero Ice-cream Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore [2001 (132) E.L.T. 623 (T)] (Appeal No. E/1724/97). 2. Smt. Radha Arun arguing for the Revenue justified the action of the Department in imposing the penalty. She submitted that since the Commissioner has already reduced the quantum of penalty amount no further reduction is called for in the facts....