<?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>2009 (5) TMI 678 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126209</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, due to ambiguity in the appellate order. The case was remanded for reconsideration of the penalty question, providing the party with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The appeal was allowed solely for the purpose of remand on the penalty issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 13:00:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163107" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 678 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126209</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, due to ambiguity in the appellate order. The case was remanded for reconsideration of the penalty question, providing the party with a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The appeal was allowed solely for the purpose of remand on the penalty issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>