<?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 (7) TMI 523 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203877</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the waiver of penalty, emphasizing that the duty payment before the show-cause notice did not constitute suppression of facts warranting penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The Tribunal ruled that there was no evidence of intent to evade duty by the respondent, thus upholding the decision that the penalty under Section 11AC was not applicable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 May 2011 13:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 523 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203877</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal challenging the waiver of penalty, emphasizing that the duty payment before the show-cause notice did not constitute suppression of facts warranting penalty imposition under Section 11AC. The Tribunal ruled that there was no evidence of intent to evade duty by the respondent, thus upholding the decision that the penalty under Section 11AC was not applicable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203877</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>