<?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>2001 (10) TMI 165 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50850</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty and the service of the show-cause notice on the appellant company. They remanded the matter for the imposition of penalties under Section 11AC for the period after its introduction and set aside the penalty on Shri A.K. Bansal under Rule 209A. Both appeals were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:54:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=89329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 165 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50850</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand of duty and the service of the show-cause notice on the appellant company. They remanded the matter for the imposition of penalties under Section 11AC for the period after its introduction and set aside the penalty on Shri A.K. Bansal under Rule 209A. Both appeals were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>