<?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>2011 (2) TMI 1620 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308935</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay admitted a case questioning the imposition of a penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules without alleging confiscation of goods in the show cause notice. The case was adjourned for interim relief after 4 weeks, with Mr. Jetly waiving service for the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2023 14:14:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721341" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 1620 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308935</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay admitted a case questioning the imposition of a penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules without alleging confiscation of goods in the show cause notice. The case was adjourned for interim relief after 4 weeks, with Mr. Jetly waiving service for the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308935</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>