<?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>2018 (1) TMI 199 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353463</link>
    <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal by maintaining the demand for Cenvat credit but reducing the penalty under Section 11AC. The decision emphasized the significance of full disclosure of relevant information to prevent allegations of suppression of facts in tax matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jan 2018 08:11:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503184" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 199 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353463</link>
      <description>The tribunal partially allowed the appeal by maintaining the demand for Cenvat credit but reducing the penalty under Section 11AC. The decision emphasized the significance of full disclosure of relevant information to prevent allegations of suppression of facts in tax matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353463</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>