<?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 (10) TMI 986 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105407</link>
    <description>Prima facie waiver of pre-deposit was refused where the appellant&#039;s limitation plea had not been raised before the lower authorities and no fresh material was produced despite earlier s, so complete interim protection was not justified. Financial hardship was considered only to the extent of granting limited relief: partial stay was allowed, subject to deposit of one crore rupees within six weeks, while recovery of the balance duty and penalty was stayed pending appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:01:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142445" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (10) TMI 986 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105407</link>
      <description>Prima facie waiver of pre-deposit was refused where the appellant&#039;s limitation plea had not been raised before the lower authorities and no fresh material was produced despite earlier s, so complete interim protection was not justified. Financial hardship was considered only to the extent of granting limited relief: partial stay was allowed, subject to deposit of one crore rupees within six weeks, while recovery of the balance duty and penalty was stayed pending appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105407</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>