<?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 (6) TMI 111 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204433</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, upheld the imposition of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the appellant for aiding in clandestine removal. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 35,000, the amount already paid by the appellant, from the initial Rs. 1.5 Lakhs. Despite the reduction, the appeal was rejected, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s involvement in aiding and abetting fraudulent activities. Mrs. Archana Wadhwa delivered the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177969" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 111 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204433</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad, upheld the imposition of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 on the appellant for aiding in clandestine removal. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 35,000, the amount already paid by the appellant, from the initial Rs. 1.5 Lakhs. Despite the reduction, the appeal was rejected, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s involvement in aiding and abetting fraudulent activities. Mrs. Archana Wadhwa delivered the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204433</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>