<?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>2006 (11) TMI 192 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32065</link>
    <description>The appeal was disposed of by setting aside the duty demand but upholding the penalty. The judgment aimed to balance rectifying the error while upholding legal compliance and deterrence against infractions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70707" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (11) TMI 192 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32065</link>
      <description>The appeal was disposed of by setting aside the duty demand but upholding the penalty. The judgment aimed to balance rectifying the error while upholding legal compliance and deterrence against infractions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 26 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32065</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>