<?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 593 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123668</link>
    <description>The appellate authority under Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has power to enhance, reduce, set aside or otherwise modify the adjudicating order, including by reducing a penalty imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. Where the rules confer discretion in penalty matters, that discretion may be exercised on appeal within jurisdiction. The Commissioner (Appeals) was therefore competent to reduce the penalty, and the reduction was valid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2012 10:43:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 593 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123668</link>
      <description>The appellate authority under Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has power to enhance, reduce, set aside or otherwise modify the adjudicating order, including by reducing a penalty imposed under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules. Where the rules confer discretion in penalty matters, that discretion may be exercised on appeal within jurisdiction. The Commissioner (Appeals) was therefore competent to reduce the penalty, and the reduction was valid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>