<?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>2007 (9) TMI 105 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2848</link>
    <description>Where the assessee&#039;s and Revenue&#039;s appeals arise from the same adjudication order but concern distinct grievances, the doctrine of merger does not bar independent consideration of the Revenue&#039;s appeal on penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The adjudication order had confirmed duty but imposed no penalty, so the Revenue&#039;s challenge remained confined to penalty alone and was not absorbed by the assessee&#039;s appeal decided on merits. The earlier appellate order therefore did not extinguish the Revenue&#039;s separate grievance, and dismissal on merger grounds was unsustainable; the matter had to be reconsidered afresh.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 105 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2848</link>
      <description>Where the assessee&#039;s and Revenue&#039;s appeals arise from the same adjudication order but concern distinct grievances, the doctrine of merger does not bar independent consideration of the Revenue&#039;s appeal on penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The adjudication order had confirmed duty but imposed no penalty, so the Revenue&#039;s challenge remained confined to penalty alone and was not absorbed by the assessee&#039;s appeal decided on merits. The earlier appellate order therefore did not extinguish the Revenue&#039;s separate grievance, and dismissal on merger grounds was unsustainable; the matter had to be reconsidered afresh.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>