<?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>2006 (3) TMI 33 - Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=634</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalties and allowing the appeals. It found that abnormal costs should not be included in production cost as per Cost Accountant Standards. The Tribunal also noted the Revenue&#039;s failure to justify their decision against the appellant in a previous case. Consequently, the Order-in-Original was deemed lacking in merit, and the penalties were considered unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40079" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 33 - Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=634</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the penalties and allowing the appeals. It found that abnormal costs should not be included in production cost as per Cost Accountant Standards. The Tribunal also noted the Revenue&#039;s failure to justify their decision against the appellant in a previous case. Consequently, the Order-in-Original was deemed lacking in merit, and the penalties were considered unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>