<?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 (10) TMI 947 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246643</link>
    <description>Penalty for default in payment of duty could not be sustained because Rule 96ZQ(5)(ii) had already been held ultra vires, so the levy imposed for the relevant period was set aside. Refund sanctioned to the assessee could not be appropriated towards that penalty because the underlying demand had no legal basis, and the adjustment was also quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:37:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=353264" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 947 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246643</link>
      <description>Penalty for default in payment of duty could not be sustained because Rule 96ZQ(5)(ii) had already been held ultra vires, so the levy imposed for the relevant period was set aside. Refund sanctioned to the assessee could not be appropriated towards that penalty because the underlying demand had no legal basis, and the adjustment was also quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>