<?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 (12) TMI 1237 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763657</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held not legally sustainable against a partnership firm, as personal penalty cannot be imposed on a firm as such. Applying the same principle, the Tribunal also found the penalty unsustainable against the partner where the firm itself was not liable on the facts found. As the penalty failed on this threshold issue, the other grounds raised by the appellants were not examined, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Dec 2024 14:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=784473" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1237 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763657</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was held not legally sustainable against a partnership firm, as personal penalty cannot be imposed on a firm as such. Applying the same principle, the Tribunal also found the penalty unsustainable against the partner where the firm itself was not liable on the facts found. As the penalty failed on this threshold issue, the other grounds raised by the appellants were not examined, and the penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>