<?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 (6) TMI 1394 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457148</link>
    <description>Where the principal dispute arising from an order-in-original is settled under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, connected co-noticee appeals challenging personal penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 do not survive. The Tribunal treated the penalty proceedings as unsustainable once the main dispute stood resolved under the scheme, with the result that the co-noticees&#039; appeals were no longer maintainable and were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2024 08:24:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=767056" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 1394 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457148</link>
      <description>Where the principal dispute arising from an order-in-original is settled under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, connected co-noticee appeals challenging personal penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 do not survive. The Tribunal treated the penalty proceedings as unsustainable once the main dispute stood resolved under the scheme, with the result that the co-noticees&#039; appeals were no longer maintainable and were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>