<?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>2000 (10) TMI 258 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94135</link>
    <description>Where the only established lapse was non-maintenance of the prescribed simplified accounts, and there was no allegation or finding of duty evasion or clandestine removal, confiscation of raw materials, semi-finished goods and finished goods was not justified. The redemption fine was therefore set aside. The admitted record-keeping failure could still attract penalty, but only at a reasonable level, so the penalty was reduced to a nominal amount.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 12:54:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (10) TMI 258 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94135</link>
      <description>Where the only established lapse was non-maintenance of the prescribed simplified accounts, and there was no allegation or finding of duty evasion or clandestine removal, confiscation of raw materials, semi-finished goods and finished goods was not justified. The redemption fine was therefore set aside. The admitted record-keeping failure could still attract penalty, but only at a reasonable level, so the penalty was reduced to a nominal amount.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94135</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>