<?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 (7) TMI 87 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329489</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the demand of duty, interest, and penalty due to insufficient evidence linking them to clandestine removal. The dropping of the penalty on the managing director was overturned, but no penalty was imposed due to the unsustainable charge. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=433636" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (7) TMI 87 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329489</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, setting aside the demand of duty, interest, and penalty due to insufficient evidence linking them to clandestine removal. The dropping of the penalty on the managing director was overturned, but no penalty was imposed due to the unsustainable charge. The assessee&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329489</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>