<?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>2006 (11) TMI 441 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), MANGALOR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120450</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed by setting aside the penalty under Rule 15, considering the early payment of duty and interest before the Show Cause Notice. The Commissioner found no justification for the penalty imposition, as the liability had been discharged promptly, in line with the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Karnataka and the Hon&#039;ble Tribunal Bangalore.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:54:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 441 - COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS), MANGALOR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120450</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed by setting aside the penalty under Rule 15, considering the early payment of duty and interest before the Show Cause Notice. The Commissioner found no justification for the penalty imposition, as the liability had been discharged promptly, in line with the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Karnataka and the Hon&#039;ble Tribunal Bangalore.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>