<?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>2017 (1) TMI 800 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337720</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting the allegations of contravention of excise rules, leading to the reversal of the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2017 08:23:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=455405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 800 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337720</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty imposed on the appellants under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The decision was based on the lack of evidence supporting the allegations of contravention of excise rules, leading to the reversal of the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>