<?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 (12) TMI 206 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83965</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 5.00 lakhs by 31-1-1995, staying the recovery of the balance duty and penalty pending appeal, subject to compliance. It upheld the lower authority&#039;s decision to include the value of the cable gland in the assessable value of Flame Proof Lighting Equipment (FPLE) and the invocation of the extended period of limitation, citing the need for further examination on the limitation issue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 19:00:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (12) TMI 206 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83965</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the petitioner to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 5.00 lakhs by 31-1-1995, staying the recovery of the balance duty and penalty pending appeal, subject to compliance. It upheld the lower authority&#039;s decision to include the value of the cable gland in the assessable value of Flame Proof Lighting Equipment (FPLE) and the invocation of the extended period of limitation, citing the need for further examination on the limitation issue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>