<?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 (10) TMI 465 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368499</link>
    <description>The tribunal overturned the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, considering the absence of mala fide intent, proper recording of transactions, and the substantial penal interest already paid. The appellant&#039;s genuine belief that duty was not required on the scrap from damaged goods, along with the payment of confirmed demand and interest, led to the penalty being set aside while the demand and interest payment were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 17:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 465 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368499</link>
      <description>The tribunal overturned the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, considering the absence of mala fide intent, proper recording of transactions, and the substantial penal interest already paid. The appellant&#039;s genuine belief that duty was not required on the scrap from damaged goods, along with the payment of confirmed demand and interest, led to the penalty being set aside while the demand and interest payment were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>