<?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>2016 (2) TMI 1225 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279831</link>
    <description>The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Single Judge&#039;s judgment and quashing the order dated 26th August 2014. It upheld that the bar under Section 32-O(1)(i) was applicable due to the respondents&#039; previous penalty for concealment of duty particulars. The decision aligned with statutory provisions and clarifications provided by the &quot;Explanation&quot; to Section 32-O(1)(i).</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2019 00:39:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 1225 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279831</link>
      <description>The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Single Judge&#039;s judgment and quashing the order dated 26th August 2014. It upheld that the bar under Section 32-O(1)(i) was applicable due to the respondents&#039; previous penalty for concealment of duty particulars. The decision aligned with statutory provisions and clarifications provided by the &quot;Explanation&quot; to Section 32-O(1)(i).</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279831</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>