<?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 (8) TMI 509 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114033</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires knowledge or mens rea that the goods were liable to confiscation. Where the appellants were merely dealers who purchased goods on invoices from the manufacturer, and the record did not establish that they knew of any alleged ineligibility to SSI exemption or guilty intent, the penalty could not be sustained. The penalty was accordingly set aside and deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 18:54:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 509 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114033</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires knowledge or mens rea that the goods were liable to confiscation. Where the appellants were merely dealers who purchased goods on invoices from the manufacturer, and the record did not establish that they knew of any alleged ineligibility to SSI exemption or guilty intent, the penalty could not be sustained. The penalty was accordingly set aside and deleted in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>