https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406601 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for alleged contravention of Rule 10 under the Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (2010 Rules). The appellant, engaged in manufacturing chewing tobacco under the Compounded Levy Scheme, successfully argued that they did not seek abatement under Rule 10 despite production during the specified period. The Tribunal held that the first proviso to Rule 10 was not applicable in this case, leading to the allowance of the appeal and granting the appellant consequential benefits in accordance with the law. en-us Mon, 22 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Apr 2021 20:33:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406601 The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant for alleged contravention of Rule 10 under the Chewing Tobacco and Unmanufactured Tobacco Packing Machines (2010 Rules). The appellant, engaged in manufacturing chewing tobacco under the Compounded Levy Scheme, successfully argued that they did not seek abatement under Rule 10 despite production during the specified period. The Tribunal held that the first proviso to Rule 10 was not applicable in this case, leading to the allowance of the appeal and granting the appellant consequential benefits in accordance with the law. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 22 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406601