<?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>2022 (7) TMI 976 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425421</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by remanding the issue of supplementary invoices to the adjudicating authority for verification. The duty liability on the respondent would be determined after such verification, with reasonable opportunity provided to the appellants to produce evidence in their favor. The appeals regarding penalties on the partner and Excise Incharge were dismissed due to lack of substantiated evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Jul 2022 09:01:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=685838" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 976 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425421</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by remanding the issue of supplementary invoices to the adjudicating authority for verification. The duty liability on the respondent would be determined after such verification, with reasonable opportunity provided to the appellants to produce evidence in their favor. The appeals regarding penalties on the partner and Excise Incharge were dismissed due to lack of substantiated evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>