<?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>2011 (3) TMI 134 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203400</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of knitted fabrics, in a case concerning the interpretation of a notification for concessional duty rates. Despite a previous Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant&#039;s bonafide belief regarding the exemption, based on circulars and notifications in force at the time, justified the dismissal of penalty imposition. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant&#039;s misunderstanding was not deliberate evasion of duty, leading to the conclusion that the penalty imposition was unnecessary. The appeals were ultimately dismissed, with the Tribunal determining that the issue did not raise a substantial question of law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 18:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176961" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 134 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203400</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, a manufacturer of knitted fabrics, in a case concerning the interpretation of a notification for concessional duty rates. Despite a previous Supreme Court judgment, the Tribunal ruled that the appellant&#039;s bonafide belief regarding the exemption, based on circulars and notifications in force at the time, justified the dismissal of penalty imposition. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant&#039;s misunderstanding was not deliberate evasion of duty, leading to the conclusion that the penalty imposition was unnecessary. The appeals were ultimately dismissed, with the Tribunal determining that the issue did not raise a substantial question of law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203400</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>