<?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>2001 (12) TMI 510 - CEGAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102682</link>
    <description>Cold rolling of steel strips was treated, on the facts presented, as not amounting to manufacture for duty purposes, following the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling on the same process. The Tribunal held that the later change in the tariff notes did not materially change the position for the period in dispute. On that prima facie view, the duty demand and related penalties were not shown to be payable at the stay stage, and pre-deposit was waived with recovery stayed pending appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 17:10:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (12) TMI 510 - CEGAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102682</link>
      <description>Cold rolling of steel strips was treated, on the facts presented, as not amounting to manufacture for duty purposes, following the Supreme Court&#039;s ruling on the same process. The Tribunal held that the later change in the tariff notes did not materially change the position for the period in dispute. On that prima facie view, the duty demand and related penalties were not shown to be payable at the stay stage, and pre-deposit was waived with recovery stayed pending appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102682</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>