<?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 (12) TMI 1577 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191707</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to enhance the penalty to match the duty confirmed under Section 11AC of the Act. The tribunal ruled that the penalty must be equal to the duty amount, as mandated by law, rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments against the penalty imposition. Consequently, the appellant&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the imposition of the enhanced penalty in line with the duty liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Apr 2017 11:04:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=465877" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1577 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191707</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to enhance the penalty to match the duty confirmed under Section 11AC of the Act. The tribunal ruled that the penalty must be equal to the duty amount, as mandated by law, rejecting the appellant&#039;s arguments against the penalty imposition. Consequently, the appellant&#039;s appeal was dismissed, affirming the imposition of the enhanced penalty in line with the duty liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=191707</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>