<?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 (9) TMI 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204306</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled in a case involving M/s. Nasik Strips Pvt. Ltd., where a duty demand and penalty for alleged clandestine manufacture of M.S. ingots were challenged. The demand was primarily based on a technical opinion report by an IIT Professor, but the show-cause notice contained errors in energy consumption limits. The Tribunal found discrepancies in evidence and granted waiver and stay of recovery for the duty and penalty amounts, including that imposed on the Managing Director, due to lack of substantial evidence and inconsistencies in the technical report, aligning with a previous tribunal ruling.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 563 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204306</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai ruled in a case involving M/s. Nasik Strips Pvt. Ltd., where a duty demand and penalty for alleged clandestine manufacture of M.S. ingots were challenged. The demand was primarily based on a technical opinion report by an IIT Professor, but the show-cause notice contained errors in energy consumption limits. The Tribunal found discrepancies in evidence and granted waiver and stay of recovery for the duty and penalty amounts, including that imposed on the Managing Director, due to lack of substantial evidence and inconsistencies in the technical report, aligning with a previous tribunal ruling.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>