<?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>1994 (3) TMI 215 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83128</link>
    <description>The Tribunal declined to modify the stay order regarding the deposit of duty amount, granting an extension of 10 weeks for payment. The decision was based on a comprehensive analysis of legal provisions, case law, and principles governing stay orders in central excise matters, emphasizing the need for a strong prima facie case for granting a stay and the mandatory pre-deposit requirement in central excise appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:50:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120273" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 215 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83128</link>
      <description>The Tribunal declined to modify the stay order regarding the deposit of duty amount, granting an extension of 10 weeks for payment. The decision was based on a comprehensive analysis of legal provisions, case law, and principles governing stay orders in central excise matters, emphasizing the need for a strong prima facie case for granting a stay and the mandatory pre-deposit requirement in central excise appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83128</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>