<?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 (5) TMI 757 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437950</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders. The appellant was entitled to the SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE as the assignment deed for the trade mark &#039;Kwality&#039; was valid, and the penalties on the partners were not legally sustainable. The decision was based on judicial discipline and consistency in tax administration, granting consequential reliefs as per the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 May 2023 09:06:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=714074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (5) TMI 757 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437950</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the impugned orders. The appellant was entitled to the SSI exemption under Notification No. 8/2003-CE as the assignment deed for the trade mark &#039;Kwality&#039; was valid, and the penalties on the partners were not legally sustainable. The decision was based on judicial discipline and consistency in tax administration, granting consequential reliefs as per the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>