<?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 (2) TMI 1551 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356130</link>
    <description>The first appellate authority reduced the penalty without analyzing the scope of penal provisions in section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-determination. The appellate authority was directed to examine the scope and limit of invoking penal provisions. The case was remanded for further proceedings to determine the scope of invoking penal provisions under section 11AC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Feb 2018 08:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510449" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1551 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356130</link>
      <description>The first appellate authority reduced the penalty without analyzing the scope of penal provisions in section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for re-determination. The appellate authority was directed to examine the scope and limit of invoking penal provisions. The case was remanded for further proceedings to determine the scope of invoking penal provisions under section 11AC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356130</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>