<?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>2012 (5) TMI 624 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177355</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order regarding a penalty for a shortage of Tread Rubber under Sections 11AC and 11AB of the Central Excise Act was successful. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was set aside due to errors in applying legal precedents and lack of proper analysis. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:02:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=412337" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (5) TMI 624 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177355</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order regarding a penalty for a shortage of Tread Rubber under Sections 11AC and 11AB of the Central Excise Act was successful. The Tribunal&#039;s decision was set aside due to errors in applying legal precedents and lack of proper analysis. The matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration in accordance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>