<?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>2014 (3) TMI 1078 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190324</link>
    <description>The Settlement Commission concluded that the applicant was barred from filing another settlement application under Section 32-O(1)(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to a penalty imposed in an earlier settlement order for concealment of duty particulars. As a result, both the applicant and co-applicant&#039;s settlement applications were dismissed, and the case was referred back to the Central Excise officer for adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:57:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 1078 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190324</link>
      <description>The Settlement Commission concluded that the applicant was barred from filing another settlement application under Section 32-O(1)(i) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, due to a penalty imposed in an earlier settlement order for concealment of duty particulars. As a result, both the applicant and co-applicant&#039;s settlement applications were dismissed, and the case was referred back to the Central Excise officer for adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>