<?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>2001 (7) TMI 567 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97973</link>
    <description>The appeal against the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was rejected. The Appellants&#039; arguments regarding misdeclaration of &#039;place of removal&#039; and suppression of facts were considered, but the Commissioner&#039;s decision was upheld. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner&#039;s decision aligned with the remand directions, focusing specifically on the penalty issue. The Appellants were advised to pursue further legal recourse if unsatisfied with the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:04:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135030" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (7) TMI 567 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97973</link>
      <description>The appeal against the imposition of a penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was rejected. The Appellants&#039; arguments regarding misdeclaration of &#039;place of removal&#039; and suppression of facts were considered, but the Commissioner&#039;s decision was upheld. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner&#039;s decision aligned with the remand directions, focusing specifically on the penalty issue. The Appellants were advised to pursue further legal recourse if unsatisfied with the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>