<?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>2004 (10) TMI 435 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114564</link>
    <description>Duty was disputed on capital goods transferred only on paper while the goods remained at the same premises and continued to be used for the same manufacturing purpose. The tribunal considered whether such a paper transfer justified recovery of duty and, pending appeal, granted stay of recovery. The disputed amount was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 17:04:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (10) TMI 435 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114564</link>
      <description>Duty was disputed on capital goods transferred only on paper while the goods remained at the same premises and continued to be used for the same manufacturing purpose. The tribunal considered whether such a paper transfer justified recovery of duty and, pending appeal, granted stay of recovery. The disputed amount was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>