<?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 (9) TMI 1362 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348605</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA upheld the confiscation of seized goods and imposition of fines and penalties under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 against the appellant, a manufacturer of M.S ERW Black pipes/tubes. The Tribunal found the appellant failed to record excess finished goods in the RG-I register, justifying the confiscation. Despite confirming the excess stock, the appellant&#039;s explanation for the discrepancy was unsatisfactory. The Tribunal reduced the Redemption Fine to &amp;amp;8377;75,000 and the penalty to &amp;amp;8377;50,000, recognizing the need for lesser fines. The appeal was disposed of with revised fines and penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2017 07:53:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=490597" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1362 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348605</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT KOLKATA upheld the confiscation of seized goods and imposition of fines and penalties under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 against the appellant, a manufacturer of M.S ERW Black pipes/tubes. The Tribunal found the appellant failed to record excess finished goods in the RG-I register, justifying the confiscation. Despite confirming the excess stock, the appellant&#039;s explanation for the discrepancy was unsatisfactory. The Tribunal reduced the Redemption Fine to &amp;amp;8377;75,000 and the penalty to &amp;amp;8377;50,000, recognizing the need for lesser fines. The appeal was disposed of with revised fines and penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348605</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>