<?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 (4) TMI 627 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98202</link>
    <description>Pre-deposit of the disputed duty was dispensed with because the appellant showed a prima facie case for separate unit-wise treatment of its claim, including small scale exemption for one unit and Modvat credit for another. On that basis, recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeal, reflecting that interim relief may be granted where the appellant demonstrates an arguable entitlement on the merits and the balance of convenience supports protection from coercive recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:11:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=135259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 627 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98202</link>
      <description>Pre-deposit of the disputed duty was dispensed with because the appellant showed a prima facie case for separate unit-wise treatment of its claim, including small scale exemption for one unit and Modvat credit for another. On that basis, recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeal, reflecting that interim relief may be granted where the appellant demonstrates an arguable entitlement on the merits and the balance of convenience supports protection from coercive recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=98202</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>