<?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 1096 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176970</link>
    <description>Mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was not attracted because the differential duty and interest were paid before the show-cause notice and the clearances were already reflected in statutory records. In the absence of suppression, misstatement, or clandestine conduct with intent to evade duty, the statutory ingredients for imposing the penalty were not established. No penalty was therefore leviable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2016 10:51:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (2) TMI 1096 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176970</link>
      <description>Mandatory penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act was not attracted because the differential duty and interest were paid before the show-cause notice and the clearances were already reflected in statutory records. In the absence of suppression, misstatement, or clandestine conduct with intent to evade duty, the statutory ingredients for imposing the penalty were not established. No penalty was therefore leviable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=176970</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>