<?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>2009 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75331</link>
    <description>Where no mala fide was found against the assessee and the related penalties had already been set aside, there was no basis to sustain confiscation of the land and building, plant and machinery. The Tribunal also noted that the earlier order had not finally decided the confiscation issue. On reconsideration, it held that the confiscation and the consequential redemption fine could not be continued and set both aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 308 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75331</link>
      <description>Where no mala fide was found against the assessee and the related penalties had already been set aside, there was no basis to sustain confiscation of the land and building, plant and machinery. The Tribunal also noted that the earlier order had not finally decided the confiscation issue. On reconsideration, it held that the confiscation and the consequential redemption fine could not be continued and set both aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>