<?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>2003 (7) TMI 500 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108597</link>
    <description>Unaccounted finished goods found outside statutory records were liable to confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, but the provision did not prescribe any minimum redemption fine for such confiscation. For personal penalty, the rule provided for Rs. 10,000 or the duty amount, whichever was greater; on the stated facts, the duty element did not exceed Rs. 10,000. The appellate authority&#039;s reduction of both redemption fine and penalty was treated as a discretionary decision based on the facts and circumstances, and it was not shown to be arbitrary or illegal, so the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 18:26:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 500 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108597</link>
      <description>Unaccounted finished goods found outside statutory records were liable to confiscation under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, but the provision did not prescribe any minimum redemption fine for such confiscation. For personal penalty, the rule provided for Rs. 10,000 or the duty amount, whichever was greater; on the stated facts, the duty element did not exceed Rs. 10,000. The appellate authority&#039;s reduction of both redemption fine and penalty was treated as a discretionary decision based on the facts and circumstances, and it was not shown to be arbitrary or illegal, so the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108597</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>