<?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 1127 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438320</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the transporter under Rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, as there was no evidence of contravention of the rules by the transporter. The Commissioner&#039;s finding that the transporter breached trust was not supported by specific evidence of wrongdoing beyond normal business practices. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the transporter, concluding that the penalties were unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 May 2023 09:05:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=714866" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (5) TMI 1127 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438320</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on the transporter under Rule 26(2)(ii) of Central Excise Rules, 2002, as there was no evidence of contravention of the rules by the transporter. The Commissioner&#039;s finding that the transporter breached trust was not supported by specific evidence of wrongdoing beyond normal business practices. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the transporter, concluding that the penalties were unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>