<?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>1997 (5) TMI 212 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87003</link>
    <description>Partial waiver of pre-deposit in a duty and penalty dispute was considered on the basis of the appellant&#039;s prima facie defence, the natural justice plea, and the valuation method adopted by the department. Records showing outside purchases did not by themselves displace the department&#039;s case that the goods may have been manufactured by the appellant, while the claim of no machinery required final hearing. The cross-examination objection did not disclose a prima facie denial of natural justice, and the appellant&#039;s alternative valuation method was not accepted merely because it was more favourable. Only partial waiver was therefore justified, subject to deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 18:10:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 212 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87003</link>
      <description>Partial waiver of pre-deposit in a duty and penalty dispute was considered on the basis of the appellant&#039;s prima facie defence, the natural justice plea, and the valuation method adopted by the department. Records showing outside purchases did not by themselves displace the department&#039;s case that the goods may have been manufactured by the appellant, while the claim of no machinery required final hearing. The cross-examination objection did not disclose a prima facie denial of natural justice, and the appellant&#039;s alternative valuation method was not accepted merely because it was more favourable. Only partial waiver was therefore justified, subject to deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>