<?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>2004 (6) TMI 520 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113916</link>
    <description>The appeals were allowed, and the orders were disposed of accordingly. Adjustments were made to the confiscation of goods, redemption fines, and penalties under the Central Excise rules. The Tribunal found the confiscation of the tempo unjustified and set aside the confiscation of raw material due to lack of specific rules. Penalties were reduced based on lack of managerial involvement, with the firm&#039;s manager escaping penalty under the Central Excise rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 12:18:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150922" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 520 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113916</link>
      <description>The appeals were allowed, and the orders were disposed of accordingly. Adjustments were made to the confiscation of goods, redemption fines, and penalties under the Central Excise rules. The Tribunal found the confiscation of the tempo unjustified and set aside the confiscation of raw material due to lack of specific rules. Penalties were reduced based on lack of managerial involvement, with the firm&#039;s manager escaping penalty under the Central Excise rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113916</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>