<?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>2019 (3) TMI 303 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376282</link>
    <description>The High Court set aside the CESTAT&#039;s order and remanded the appeal for fresh disposal, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant evidence and statements in determining liability for excise duty. The court highlighted the mandatory nature of Section 11D and the need for strict construction of penal provisions in excise law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 14:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=561454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 303 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376282</link>
      <description>The High Court set aside the CESTAT&#039;s order and remanded the appeal for fresh disposal, emphasizing the importance of considering all relevant evidence and statements in determining liability for excise duty. The court highlighted the mandatory nature of Section 11D and the need for strict construction of penal provisions in excise law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376282</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>