<?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>2000 (11) TMI 397 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95079</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the applicants had not shown a strong prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in a stay petition concerning the compounded levy scheme, exemption, and Modvat credit on intermediate products. As the rival contentions were arguable on both sides, complete waiver was refused. Partial deposit was directed, and recovery of the balance duty and penalty was stayed during pendency of the appeal on compliance with the specified deposit condition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2011 17:09:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=132138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (11) TMI 397 - CEGAT, CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95079</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the applicants had not shown a strong prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in a stay petition concerning the compounded levy scheme, exemption, and Modvat credit on intermediate products. As the rival contentions were arguable on both sides, complete waiver was refused. Partial deposit was directed, and recovery of the balance duty and penalty was stayed during pendency of the appeal on compliance with the specified deposit condition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Nov 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=95079</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>