<?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 838 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327857</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the duty demand and interest while reducing the penalty imposed on the appellant. The judgment highlighted the unconstitutionality of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules and the correct application of penalty rules under the Central Excise Rules.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 May 2016 17:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 838 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327857</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the duty demand and interest while reducing the penalty imposed on the appellant. The judgment highlighted the unconstitutionality of Rule 8(3A) of the Central Excise Rules and the correct application of penalty rules under the Central Excise Rules.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>