<?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 (11) TMI 370 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114670</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the classification of &#039;Red Mud&#039; as an excisable item under the CETA Schedule. Despite the original authority and first appellate authority upholding the duty demand, the Tribunal granted waiver and stay of recovery, citing similarities with a precedent case where a similar material was deemed non-marketable. The penalty imposed was set aside by the first appellate authority, and the Tribunal focused on the classification issue rather than the penalty in its judgment. The appellants&#039; appeal for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery was granted by the Tribunal based on a prima facie case and parallel with the precedent case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 18:01:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151669" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 370 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114670</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants regarding the classification of &#039;Red Mud&#039; as an excisable item under the CETA Schedule. Despite the original authority and first appellate authority upholding the duty demand, the Tribunal granted waiver and stay of recovery, citing similarities with a precedent case where a similar material was deemed non-marketable. The penalty imposed was set aside by the first appellate authority, and the Tribunal focused on the classification issue rather than the penalty in its judgment. The appellants&#039; appeal for waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery was granted by the Tribunal based on a prima facie case and parallel with the precedent case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>