<?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 (9) TMI 566 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78299</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal against the Customs Excise and Service tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order, finding that despite procedural lapses, the dealer&#039;s consistent duty payments and efforts to rectify errors promptly demonstrated compliance. The Court emphasized the importance of timely payments and proper accounting practices, ultimately concluding that there were no grounds to admit the appeal, as the dealer did not default in duty payment. The judgment highlighted the significance of adherence to regulatory requirements and recognized the dealer&#039;s actions as not constituting a substantive default.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 13:15:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 566 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78299</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal against the Customs Excise and Service tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order, finding that despite procedural lapses, the dealer&#039;s consistent duty payments and efforts to rectify errors promptly demonstrated compliance. The Court emphasized the importance of timely payments and proper accounting practices, ultimately concluding that there were no grounds to admit the appeal, as the dealer did not default in duty payment. The judgment highlighted the significance of adherence to regulatory requirements and recognized the dealer&#039;s actions as not constituting a substantive default.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>