<?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 771 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448372</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling that the appellants were entitled to the benefits of the SVLDR Scheme despite not filing a declaration. The Tribunal determined that the procedural requirement of filing a declaration should not bar the appellants from relief, particularly when only penalties were involved. Consequently, the penalties imposed under the Central Excise Rules were waived, and the impugned order was not upheld on its merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2024 08:58:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=740409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 771 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448372</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeals, ruling that the appellants were entitled to the benefits of the SVLDR Scheme despite not filing a declaration. The Tribunal determined that the procedural requirement of filing a declaration should not bar the appellants from relief, particularly when only penalties were involved. Consequently, the penalties imposed under the Central Excise Rules were waived, and the impugned order was not upheld on its merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448372</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>