<?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 (2) TMI 1029 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339329</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to delete the penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found no evidence of deliberate defiance of the law by the assessee, concluding that there was no contumacious conduct as the tax was paid upon being informed by the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Mar 2017 18:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459640" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1029 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339329</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to delete the penalty under Section 11 AC of the Act, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal. The Tribunal found no evidence of deliberate defiance of the law by the assessee, concluding that there was no contumacious conduct as the tax was paid upon being informed by the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>