<?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>2012 (4) TMI 182 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211895</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the assessee discontinued the concessional benefit of Notification No. 9/99-C.Ex. with the approval of the excise authorities before the financial year ended. Once permission was granted, the discontinuance did not amount to breach of the notification conditions. The provision also required contravention with intent to evade duty, and no such intent was alleged. The absence of any demand for differential duty for the relevant period further supported deletion of the penalty, which was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (4) TMI 182 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211895</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held unsustainable where the assessee discontinued the concessional benefit of Notification No. 9/99-C.Ex. with the approval of the excise authorities before the financial year ended. Once permission was granted, the discontinuance did not amount to breach of the notification conditions. The provision also required contravention with intent to evade duty, and no such intent was alleged. The absence of any demand for differential duty for the relevant period further supported deletion of the penalty, which was upheld in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Apr 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>