<?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>2010 (1) TMI 1069 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153960</link>
    <description>Penalty was held unsustainable for short-payment of special excise duty where the appellant had disclosed clearances in returns, later paid the duty with interest, and the record showed budget-related confusion rather than deliberate evasion. The Tribunal found the ingredients for penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q absent, so the penalty was waived. Redemption fine was also held unsustainable because the goods had already been cleared and were not available for confiscation, making the prerequisite for such fine unsatisfied. Relief was granted on both counts, while the duty and interest already discharged were left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2013 11:42:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170994" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 1069 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153960</link>
      <description>Penalty was held unsustainable for short-payment of special excise duty where the appellant had disclosed clearances in returns, later paid the duty with interest, and the record showed budget-related confusion rather than deliberate evasion. The Tribunal found the ingredients for penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and Rule 173Q absent, so the penalty was waived. Redemption fine was also held unsustainable because the goods had already been cleared and were not available for confiscation, making the prerequisite for such fine unsatisfied. Relief was granted on both counts, while the duty and interest already discharged were left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>