<?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>2015 (2) TMI 220 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256220</link>
    <description>The judgment allowed the appeal filed by M/s. Gujaral Traders against the penalty imposed for under-remittance of Excise Duty. The court found that there was no evidence of collusion or foreknowledge of the Duty evasion by the appellant, leading to the penalty imposition being deemed unjustified. The order was quashed, and the appeal was allowed without costs, emphasizing the necessity of establishing culpability before imposing penalties in Excise Duty cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2015 10:37:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=375433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 220 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256220</link>
      <description>The judgment allowed the appeal filed by M/s. Gujaral Traders against the penalty imposed for under-remittance of Excise Duty. The court found that there was no evidence of collusion or foreknowledge of the Duty evasion by the appellant, leading to the penalty imposition being deemed unjustified. The order was quashed, and the appeal was allowed without costs, emphasizing the necessity of establishing culpability before imposing penalties in Excise Duty cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=256220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>