<?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>2013 (5) TMI 989 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274207</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in a case involving contravention of Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal found that penalty under section 11AC was not automatically applicable due to insufficient evidence supporting clandestine removal allegations. The case was remanded for further examination to determine if such allegations were substantiated, emphasizing the necessity of thorough analysis and evidence before imposing penalties under the Central Excise Rules. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed on this basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2018 14:07:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=529192" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (5) TMI 989 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274207</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal set aside the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) in a case involving contravention of Central Excise Rules. The Tribunal found that penalty under section 11AC was not automatically applicable due to insufficient evidence supporting clandestine removal allegations. The case was remanded for further examination to determine if such allegations were substantiated, emphasizing the necessity of thorough analysis and evidence before imposing penalties under the Central Excise Rules. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed on this basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>