<?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>1990 (2) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42733</link>
    <description>A show cause notice under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules cannot be sustained against company officers unless it contains a factual basis showing their concern with the offending goods and the requisite knowledge or reason to believe that duty had not been paid or the goods were liable to confiscation. Where the notice merely alleges contravention without linking particular officers to the alleged evasion or factory operations, and no averment connects them with the impugned goods, penal proceedings cannot validly continue against them. The notice was quashed insofar as it related to the petitioners, and further action against them was restrained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:04:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81262" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (2) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42733</link>
      <description>A show cause notice under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules cannot be sustained against company officers unless it contains a factual basis showing their concern with the offending goods and the requisite knowledge or reason to believe that duty had not been paid or the goods were liable to confiscation. Where the notice merely alleges contravention without linking particular officers to the alleged evasion or factory operations, and no averment connects them with the impugned goods, penal proceedings cannot validly continue against them. The notice was quashed insofar as it related to the petitioners, and further action against them was restrained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>