<?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 (3) TMI 842 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393698</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the penalty imposed under Rule 26 for issuing invoices without supplying goods. The decision was based on the lack of substantial evidence to prove the allegations, consistent with previous judgments involving the same parties and evidence. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders regarding the penalty were overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 11:08:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 842 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393698</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the penalty imposed under Rule 26 for issuing invoices without supplying goods. The decision was based on the lack of substantial evidence to prove the allegations, consistent with previous judgments involving the same parties and evidence. The appeals were allowed, and the impugned orders regarding the penalty were overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393698</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>