<?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>1996 (7) TMI 325 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85681</link>
    <description>The note addresses waiver of pre-deposit for disputed Modvat credit on hot-tops and refractory bricks. The claim for hot-tops was treated as supported by a prima facie case, while the claim for fire bricks was not on the same footing. Admissibility of credit under Rule 57A was left open for determination at the main appeal hearing. The appellants were directed to deposit Rs. 30,000 within six weeks; on compliance, the balance pre-deposit was waived and the impugned order stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 15:19:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (7) TMI 325 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85681</link>
      <description>The note addresses waiver of pre-deposit for disputed Modvat credit on hot-tops and refractory bricks. The claim for hot-tops was treated as supported by a prima facie case, while the claim for fire bricks was not on the same footing. Admissibility of credit under Rule 57A was left open for determination at the main appeal hearing. The appellants were directed to deposit Rs. 30,000 within six weeks; on compliance, the balance pre-deposit was waived and the impugned order stayed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>