<?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 1167 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339467</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the demand for interest under Section 11AA for the period in question, despite an earlier dropping of interest under Section 11AB. However, the penalty of 20,000 imposed under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was waived as the appellant acted in good faith believing interest was not chargeable after the earlier proceedings. The appeal was partially allowed, with the tribunal upholding the interest demand under Section 11AA but waiving the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2017 16:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=459896" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (2) TMI 1167 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339467</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the demand for interest under Section 11AA for the period in question, despite an earlier dropping of interest under Section 11AB. However, the penalty of 20,000 imposed under Rule 25(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 was waived as the appellant acted in good faith believing interest was not chargeable after the earlier proceedings. The appeal was partially allowed, with the tribunal upholding the interest demand under Section 11AA but waiving the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339467</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>