<?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 (3) TMI 1693 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277957</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act could not be applied to a period before 28.09.1996, because the penal provision was not in force for that earlier period. The duty liability for the pre-28.09.1996 period was not disturbed, but the penalty was held unsustainable to that extent. The operative principle is that a penal provision cannot be given retrospective effect to cover conduct occurring before its commencement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2019 09:49:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=550538" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 1693 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277957</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act could not be applied to a period before 28.09.1996, because the penal provision was not in force for that earlier period. The duty liability for the pre-28.09.1996 period was not disturbed, but the penalty was held unsustainable to that extent. The operative principle is that a penal provision cannot be given retrospective effect to cover conduct occurring before its commencement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277957</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>