<?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>1998 (6) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89294</link>
    <description>Pre-deposit of penalty was waived at the stay stage because the applicants had already paid the full duty before the adjudication concluded. On that basis, the penalty demand was treated as fit for interim relief, and the confiscation of plant and machinery was directed to remain in abeyance during the appeal. The order granted stay of the penalty and preserved the status quo on confiscation pending final disposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2011 10:50:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126356" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (6) TMI 234 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89294</link>
      <description>Pre-deposit of penalty was waived at the stay stage because the applicants had already paid the full duty before the adjudication concluded. On that basis, the penalty demand was treated as fit for interim relief, and the confiscation of plant and machinery was directed to remain in abeyance during the appeal. The order granted stay of the penalty and preserved the status quo on confiscation pending final disposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>