Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2011 (10) TMI 529

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri A. Khanna, DR, for the Respondent. ORDER Ld. Counsel submits that a composite penalty of Rs. 1 lakh has been levied invoking Rules 9(2), 173Q and 226 of Central Excise Rules, 1944 in respect of certain allegations made in the Show Cause Notice (SCN). When the penalties were leviable under three different Rules as was envisaged by SCN, the authority should have examined the issue prope....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion apparent by reading of all the three distinct rules which were prevalent at the material time. In absence of any composite prescription of levy of penalty, reason also being absent for invoking the respective rule and whether ingredients of those rules were present not being brought out by the orders of authorities below, it is difficult to approve their action. Cogent evidence in respect of c....