<?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 (6) TMI 968 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344697</link>
    <description>In de novo proceedings after remand, penalty cannot be enhanced to the prejudice of the appellant beyond the quantum fixed in the earlier order, particularly where the Revenue did not separately challenge that original penalty. Applying this principle, the enhanced penalty imposed in the remand order was held unsustainable and was reduced back to the earlier amount. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jun 2017 08:07:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=474801" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 968 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344697</link>
      <description>In de novo proceedings after remand, penalty cannot be enhanced to the prejudice of the appellant beyond the quantum fixed in the earlier order, particularly where the Revenue did not separately challenge that original penalty. Applying this principle, the enhanced penalty imposed in the remand order was held unsustainable and was reduced back to the earlier amount. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief, if any.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=344697</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>