<?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>2025 (5) TMI 57 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769785</link>
    <description>Tribunal ruled in favor of job-workers, finding no concrete evidence of collusion in CENVAT credit fraud. The Rs.50 Lakhs penalty per appellant was deemed excessive and beyond statutory limits under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The show cause notice contained internal contradictions, lacking substantive proof to implicate the appellants. Appeals were allowed, and penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 May 2025 08:54:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=818902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 57 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769785</link>
      <description>Tribunal ruled in favor of job-workers, finding no concrete evidence of collusion in CENVAT credit fraud. The Rs.50 Lakhs penalty per appellant was deemed excessive and beyond statutory limits under Rule 26 of Central Excise Rules, 2002. The show cause notice contained internal contradictions, lacking substantive proof to implicate the appellants. Appeals were allowed, and penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769785</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>