<?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>2005 (2) TMI 719 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116131</link>
    <description>Prima facie excisability of signages was examined against the Board&#039;s Section 37B order and the Supreme Court decisions cited by the assessee, and the Tribunal found that the Commissioner had not adequately considered those authorities. On the photographs of the signages and the manufacturing process described, the challenge to duty liability appeared well founded at the prima facie stage. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were therefore granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 15:09:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153129" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 719 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116131</link>
      <description>Prima facie excisability of signages was examined against the Board&#039;s Section 37B order and the Supreme Court decisions cited by the assessee, and the Tribunal found that the Commissioner had not adequately considered those authorities. On the photographs of the signages and the manufacturing process described, the challenge to duty liability appeared well founded at the prima facie stage. Waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery were therefore granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>