<?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>2009 (1) TMI 113 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33022</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s reduction of the mandatory penalty under section 11AC to 25% because the duty was paid prior to issuance of the demand. The court found the payment (07.01.2002) satisfied the first proviso to section 11AC and that reduction was permissible subject to compliance with the second proviso. No substantial question of law arose to disturb the Tribunal&#039;s exercise in reducing the penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2025 13:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 113 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33022</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal&#039;s reduction of the mandatory penalty under section 11AC to 25% because the duty was paid prior to issuance of the demand. The court found the payment (07.01.2002) satisfied the first proviso to section 11AC and that reduction was permissible subject to compliance with the second proviso. No substantial question of law arose to disturb the Tribunal&#039;s exercise in reducing the penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33022</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>