<?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 (4) TMI 1063 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211580</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the penalty amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act cannot be less than the confirmed duty amount. In a case where duty was confirmed for clandestine removal of goods at Rs. 10,80,914.36, the Tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The Court ruled in favor of the department, stating that the penalty should be at least the confirmed duty amount. This decision reinforces that penalties cannot be lowered below the confirmed duty amount, even when upheld by the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1063 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211580</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the penalty amount under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act cannot be less than the confirmed duty amount. In a case where duty was confirmed for clandestine removal of goods at Rs. 10,80,914.36, the Tribunal reduced the penalty to Rs. 2.5 lakhs. The Court ruled in favor of the department, stating that the penalty should be at least the confirmed duty amount. This decision reinforces that penalties cannot be lowered below the confirmed duty amount, even when upheld by the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211580</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>