<?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>2009 (10) TMI 257 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76284</link>
    <description>The court ruled that the relevant date for the payment of interest under Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act is the date when the duty is finally determined on remand, not the date of the initial order that was set aside. As the duty was determined on 22nd March 2002, and the provisions of Section 11AA(2) applied, no interest could be demanded under Section 11AA(1). The petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute in favor of the petitioners, with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114501" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (10) TMI 257 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76284</link>
      <description>The court ruled that the relevant date for the payment of interest under Section 11AA of the Central Excise Act is the date when the duty is finally determined on remand, not the date of the initial order that was set aside. As the duty was determined on 22nd March 2002, and the provisions of Section 11AA(2) applied, no interest could be demanded under Section 11AA(1). The petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute in favor of the petitioners, with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76284</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>