<?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>2008 (4) TMI 574 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123544</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for 10% of the value of exempted goods cleared due to the appellants&#039; failure to maintain separate inventory. However, the penalty imposed under Rule 15 was set aside as it was not justified in this case. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the decision pronounced on 15-4-2008.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2012 11:30:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 574 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123544</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for 10% of the value of exempted goods cleared due to the appellants&#039; failure to maintain separate inventory. However, the penalty imposed under Rule 15 was set aside as it was not justified in this case. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, with the decision pronounced on 15-4-2008.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>