<?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 (12) TMI 542 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113259</link>
    <description>A prima facie case justified waiver of pre-deposit of penalty pending appeal, as the Tribunal found that the notice and order disclosed enough material in the appellant&#039;s favour. The allegation that employees misused blank signed forms was held insufficient, at this stage, to sustain the penalty for the limited purpose of deciding stay relief. Pre-deposit of the penalty was therefore waived during the pendency of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 15:36:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150275" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 542 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113259</link>
      <description>A prima facie case justified waiver of pre-deposit of penalty pending appeal, as the Tribunal found that the notice and order disclosed enough material in the appellant&#039;s favour. The allegation that employees misused blank signed forms was held insufficient, at this stage, to sustain the penalty for the limited purpose of deciding stay relief. Pre-deposit of the penalty was therefore waived during the pendency of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>