<?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>2005 (1) TMI 233 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53917</link>
    <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11AC was found unsustainable where the goods were claimed to have been stolen from the factory, an FIR had been lodged, duty liability was not disputed, and the record showed no intention to contravene excise law. In the absence of mens rea, the material did not justify penal action, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:16:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92394" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 233 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53917</link>
      <description>Penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 read with Section 11AC was found unsustainable where the goods were claimed to have been stolen from the factory, an FIR had been lodged, duty liability was not disputed, and the record showed no intention to contravene excise law. In the absence of mens rea, the material did not justify penal action, and the penalty was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>