<?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 (4) TMI 1158 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359047</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty of &amp;amp;8377; 1,34,944 imposed on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Rules, allowing the appeal with any consequential benefits as per law. The appellant successfully argued against being penalized for the vendor&#039;s duty discharge error, leading to the penalty being overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2018 06:56:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=517786" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1158 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359047</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty of &amp;amp;8377; 1,34,944 imposed on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Rules, allowing the appeal with any consequential benefits as per law. The appellant successfully argued against being penalized for the vendor&#039;s duty discharge error, leading to the penalty being overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>