<?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>2003 (5) TMI 249 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107408</link>
    <description>The Tribunal modified a previous order in two appeals regarding duty demand and penalties. The case involved disputes over the valuation of grey cloth impacting duty levy on final products, transfer of the factory, refund of duty, interest on receivables, and administrative charges. The Tribunal acknowledged a mistake in not reflecting arguments in the stay order but clarified that all submissions were duly considered. It rejected the suggestion to adjust duty payable by the assessee from the factory purchaser, granting a month for payment of Rs. 2 crores with dismissal of appeals for non-compliance. The judgment emphasized procedural compliance, proper valuation methods, and balanced decision-making by the Tribunal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Mar 2012 12:25:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=144425" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 249 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107408</link>
      <description>The Tribunal modified a previous order in two appeals regarding duty demand and penalties. The case involved disputes over the valuation of grey cloth impacting duty levy on final products, transfer of the factory, refund of duty, interest on receivables, and administrative charges. The Tribunal acknowledged a mistake in not reflecting arguments in the stay order but clarified that all submissions were duly considered. It rejected the suggestion to adjust duty payable by the assessee from the factory purchaser, granting a month for payment of Rs. 2 crores with dismissal of appeals for non-compliance. The judgment emphasized procedural compliance, proper valuation methods, and balanced decision-making by the Tribunal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=107408</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>