<?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 (2) TMI 1014 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449863</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Rs. 10,00,000 penalty imposed on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as the penalty was not justified due to the absence of goods confiscation or invoice-related issues in the second SCN. The appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 08:19:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744410" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1014 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449863</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Rs. 10,00,000 penalty imposed on the appellant under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, as the penalty was not justified due to the absence of goods confiscation or invoice-related issues in the second SCN. The appeal was allowed, granting consequential relief to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>