<?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>1992 (12) TMI 155 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82913</link>
    <description>In excise matters, duty is ordinarily attracted on removal from the factory, and the appellants showed a prima facie case for interim protection where the molasses remained in kachcha pits within the licensed premises, the Department knew of the storage arrangement, the remission application was still pending, and limitation was raised. On those facts, the stay request was granted in their favour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Jul 2011 11:34:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120058" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (12) TMI 155 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82913</link>
      <description>In excise matters, duty is ordinarily attracted on removal from the factory, and the appellants showed a prima facie case for interim protection where the molasses remained in kachcha pits within the licensed premises, the Department knew of the storage arrangement, the remission application was still pending, and limitation was raised. On those facts, the stay request was granted in their favour.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>