<?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>2016 (5) TMI 608 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327627</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, ruling that the settlement of the main noticee&#039;s case does not automatically settle the case against other noticees when their liabilities stem from separate causes of action. Additionally, penalties under Rule 26 can be imposed even without actual confiscation if an offense warranting confiscation occurred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428200" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 608 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327627</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, ruling that the settlement of the main noticee&#039;s case does not automatically settle the case against other noticees when their liabilities stem from separate causes of action. Additionally, penalties under Rule 26 can be imposed even without actual confiscation if an offense warranting confiscation occurred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327627</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>