<?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>2024 (1) TMI 388 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447989</link>
    <description>Settlement under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 can bring pending excise disputes to an end by operation of law once discharge certificates in Form-4 are issued; the three appeals were therefore treated as dismissed as deemed withdrawn. The remaining appellant&#039;s penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 could not survive because the underlying dispute had been settled and, independently, the allegation did not establish the specific conscious knowledge or involvement required for such penalty. The penalty was accordingly set aside, and the matter was concluded by treating the settled appeals as withdrawn and annulling the surviving penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:18:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=739496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 388 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447989</link>
      <description>Settlement under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019 can bring pending excise disputes to an end by operation of law once discharge certificates in Form-4 are issued; the three appeals were therefore treated as dismissed as deemed withdrawn. The remaining appellant&#039;s penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 could not survive because the underlying dispute had been settled and, independently, the allegation did not establish the specific conscious knowledge or involvement required for such penalty. The penalty was accordingly set aside, and the matter was concluded by treating the settled appeals as withdrawn and annulling the surviving penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>