<?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>2002 (1) TMI 708 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101338</link>
    <description>A pre-deposit waiver request concerning a penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was considered in a dispute arising from the drawal of copper wire from copper rods. The Tribunal treated the underlying manufacture question as still arguable on the record, but held that the controversy did not justify complete waiver of deposit. It directed deposit of Rs. 20,000, and on compliance the balance penalty was waived for pre-deposit purposes and recovery of the remaining amount was stayed during the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:55:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=138388" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (1) TMI 708 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101338</link>
      <description>A pre-deposit waiver request concerning a penalty under Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was considered in a dispute arising from the drawal of copper wire from copper rods. The Tribunal treated the underlying manufacture question as still arguable on the record, but held that the controversy did not justify complete waiver of deposit. It directed deposit of Rs. 20,000, and on compliance the balance penalty was waived for pre-deposit purposes and recovery of the remaining amount was stayed during the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=101338</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>