Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesEXCISE DUTY | 10% Penalty Valid U/s 25 Despite Interpretational Dispute And...

EXCISE DUTY | 10% Penalty Valid U/s 25 Despite Interpretational Dispute And Not Fraud: CESTAT

Indirect Taxes

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
cestat

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, has upheld the imposition of penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, even in the absence of fraud, suppression, or wilful misstatement, in a significant ruling involving Little Star Foods Pvt Ltd. The bench of Angad Prasad  (Judicial Member) and A.K. Jyotishi…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Direct Tax

ITO Cuts Rs. 1.42 Lakh Income Tax Demand to Rs. 671 Despite S. 154 Time-Limit Objection [READ ORDER]

In a significant taxpayer-relief case, the Income Tax Department has reduced a demand of...
Direct Tax

Bombay High Court Quashes Rs. 20.16 Crore TP Adjustment as Mandatory SCN Was Not Served

The Bombay High Court has set aside a transfer pricing order proposing an adjustment...
Supreme Court

Homebuyers Can’t Be Penalised for Developer’s “Past Sins”: Supreme Court Rejects NOIDA’s Time Extension Charges as CIRP Costs

In a significant ruling protecting homebuyers affected by prolonged insolvency proceedings, the Supreme Court...
Supreme Court

S. 106 Can’t Replace Proof of Guilt: Supreme Court Acquits Man in Kidnapping-Murder Case, Calls Investigation ‘Shoddy’

The Supreme Court has acquitted a man convicted in a kidnapping and murder case...

More like this

Direct Tax

ITO Cuts Rs. 1.42 Lakh Income Tax Demand to Rs. 671 Despite S. 154 Time-Limit Objection [READ ORDER]

In a significant taxpayer-relief case, the Income Tax Department has reduced a demand of...
Direct Tax

Bombay High Court Quashes Rs. 20.16 Crore TP Adjustment as Mandatory SCN Was Not Served

The Bombay High Court has set aside a transfer pricing order proposing an adjustment...
Supreme Court

Homebuyers Can’t Be Penalised for Developer’s “Past Sins”: Supreme Court Rejects NOIDA’s Time Extension Charges as CIRP Costs

In a significant ruling protecting homebuyers affected by prolonged insolvency proceedings, the Supreme Court...