<?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 (7) TMI 23 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=687</link>
    <description>HC held that deposit of duty after clandestine removal and before issuance of a show cause notice does not preclude applicability of Section 11AC; the provision creates penalty liability where its situations are met, and mere pre-notice payment does not negate those circumstances. Because the case fell under Section 11(2C), issuance of a notice under Section 11 was not barred, and the authorities could proceed with penalty proceedings despite the prior payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 23 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=687</link>
      <description>HC held that deposit of duty after clandestine removal and before issuance of a show cause notice does not preclude applicability of Section 11AC; the provision creates penalty liability where its situations are met, and mere pre-notice payment does not negate those circumstances. Because the case fell under Section 11(2C), issuance of a notice under Section 11 was not barred, and the authorities could proceed with penalty proceedings despite the prior payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>