<?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 (7) TMI 911 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211772</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal upholding the adjustment of penalty against the refund amount claimed by the appellant. It was found that since the penalty order had been remanded by the Tribunal, the penalty was deemed non-existent, making the adjustment improper. The Tribunal allowed the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the importance of valid orders in financial adjustments and ensuring adherence to legal procedures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 08:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 911 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211772</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the order-in-appeal upholding the adjustment of penalty against the refund amount claimed by the appellant. It was found that since the penalty order had been remanded by the Tribunal, the penalty was deemed non-existent, making the adjustment improper. The Tribunal allowed the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the importance of valid orders in financial adjustments and ensuring adherence to legal procedures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211772</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>