<?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 (11) TMI 1347 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389098</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, highlighting procedural errors in issuing separate orders for duty and confiscation/penalty arising from the same investigation. The appellant&#039;s compliance with BIS rules and the conclusion of proceedings under Section 11AC(1)(d) were crucial in overturning the impugned order. The Tribunal declared the order on confiscation and penalty as without jurisdiction, granting consequential benefits to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2020 18:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=595826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 1347 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389098</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, highlighting procedural errors in issuing separate orders for duty and confiscation/penalty arising from the same investigation. The appellant&#039;s compliance with BIS rules and the conclusion of proceedings under Section 11AC(1)(d) were crucial in overturning the impugned order. The Tribunal declared the order on confiscation and penalty as without jurisdiction, granting consequential benefits to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>