<?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>2005 (6) TMI 449 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116377</link>
    <description>Under the Compounded Levy Scheme, the proviso to Rule 96ZP(3) made penalty mandatory even though the duty demand was not contested and had already been paid. Complete waiver was therefore unavailable, but the surrounding facts, including prior payment of duty, were relevant to the quantum of penalty. The penalty was upheld as mandatory, while the amount was reduced to Rs. 5,000.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2012 18:12:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 449 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116377</link>
      <description>Under the Compounded Levy Scheme, the proviso to Rule 96ZP(3) made penalty mandatory even though the duty demand was not contested and had already been paid. Complete waiver was therefore unavailable, but the surrounding facts, including prior payment of duty, were relevant to the quantum of penalty. The penalty was upheld as mandatory, while the amount was reduced to Rs. 5,000.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>