<?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 (10) TMI 374 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265099</link>
    <description>The court partially allowed the writ petition, ruling that the penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission, nearly equal to 100% of the duty, was not in line with statutory provisions. It directed the refund of excess penalty paid if conditions under Section 11AC proviso were fulfilled, instructing the authorities to process the refund application. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Dec 2017 09:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 374 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265099</link>
      <description>The court partially allowed the writ petition, ruling that the penalty imposed by the Settlement Commission, nearly equal to 100% of the duty, was not in line with statutory provisions. It directed the refund of excess penalty paid if conditions under Section 11AC proviso were fulfilled, instructing the authorities to process the refund application. Each party was ordered to bear their own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265099</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>