<?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>1999 (10) TMI 171 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92314</link>
    <description>For waiver of pre-deposit in a duty demand, the applicant must show a strong prima facie case. Where the assessee had earlier paid duty on the disputed goods but later stopped payment without intimation or a revised declaration, the Tribunal treated the short-payment as prima facie established. It also found that invocation of the larger limitation period was prima facie justified, and the plea based on departmental knowledge and delayed notice was not accepted at that stage. Full waiver was declined, and only partial interim relief was granted with a directed deposit, while the balance demand and penalties were stayed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:10:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=129375" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (10) TMI 171 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92314</link>
      <description>For waiver of pre-deposit in a duty demand, the applicant must show a strong prima facie case. Where the assessee had earlier paid duty on the disputed goods but later stopped payment without intimation or a revised declaration, the Tribunal treated the short-payment as prima facie established. It also found that invocation of the larger limitation period was prima facie justified, and the plea based on departmental knowledge and delayed notice was not accepted at that stage. Full waiver was declined, and only partial interim relief was granted with a directed deposit, while the balance demand and penalties were stayed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>