<?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>2020 (2) TMI 904 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392460</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the findings of the lower authorities regarding the short payment of duty and the appellant&#039;s liability. The penalty under Rule 26 was deemed appropriate but reduced to Rs. 10,00,000/- considering the circumstances. The appeal was partially allowed, reducing the penalty imposed on the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 904 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392460</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the findings of the lower authorities regarding the short payment of duty and the appellant&#039;s liability. The penalty under Rule 26 was deemed appropriate but reduced to Rs. 10,00,000/- considering the circumstances. The appeal was partially allowed, reducing the penalty imposed on the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392460</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>