<?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>2023 (2) TMI 40 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433525</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on M/s Zapak Digital Entertainment Limited under rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The decision emphasized the inapplicability of Rule 209A on artificial persons and highlighted the distinction between natural and artificial entities. The appeal was allowed, aligning with past precedents and principles regarding penalties on artificial persons in excise matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2023 08:56:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=703575" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 40 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433525</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on M/s Zapak Digital Entertainment Limited under rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The decision emphasized the inapplicability of Rule 209A on artificial persons and highlighted the distinction between natural and artificial entities. The appeal was allowed, aligning with past precedents and principles regarding penalties on artificial persons in excise matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=433525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>