<?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>2007 (1) TMI 335 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120776</link>
    <description>The High Court remanded the appeal to reconsider the penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 6,98,867 to Rs. 25,000, interpreting the penalty as a minimum specified by law. The appellant paid duty, interest, and penalty within the required timeframe, meeting payment obligations. The first proviso to Section 11AC reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty determined for prompt payment. The Tribunal considered prior deposits as compliant, concluding that the appellant fulfilled payment requirements. The reduced penalty was upheld, and the appellant was absolved from further penalty liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:41:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (1) TMI 335 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120776</link>
      <description>The High Court remanded the appeal to reconsider the penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The Tribunal reduced the penalty from Rs. 6,98,867 to Rs. 25,000, interpreting the penalty as a minimum specified by law. The appellant paid duty, interest, and penalty within the required timeframe, meeting payment obligations. The first proviso to Section 11AC reduced the penalty to 25% of the duty determined for prompt payment. The Tribunal considered prior deposits as compliant, concluding that the appellant fulfilled payment requirements. The reduced penalty was upheld, and the appellant was absolved from further penalty liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>