<?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 (5) TMI 1094 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380366</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, remanding the matter for re-adjudication. It directed a fresh examination of all appellant&#039;s arguments and evidence, reviewing interest applicability under Section 11AA. The penalty under Section 11AC was deleted due to the lack of evidence supporting its imposition, emphasizing debatable rule interpretations and absence of suppression or fraud indications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2019 07:01:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=571806" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 1094 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380366</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, remanding the matter for re-adjudication. It directed a fresh examination of all appellant&#039;s arguments and evidence, reviewing interest applicability under Section 11AA. The penalty under Section 11AC was deleted due to the lack of evidence supporting its imposition, emphasizing debatable rule interpretations and absence of suppression or fraud indications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380366</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>