<?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 (9) TMI 555 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366819</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires that the goods be liable to confiscation; where the show cause notice did not propose confiscation and the goods were not held liable to confiscation, the statutory precondition for penalty was absent. The penalty was therefore not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Sep 2018 09:41:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533956" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 555 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366819</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 requires that the goods be liable to confiscation; where the show cause notice did not propose confiscation and the goods were not held liable to confiscation, the statutory precondition for penalty was absent. The penalty was therefore not sustainable and was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>