<?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 (5) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116269</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit where the dispute concerned whether cleared parts were to be treated as complete coloured television sets under Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules and whether MRP-based clearance under Notification No. 5/01 applied. It noted that the Revenue itself proceeded on the basis that the parts were deemed complete TVs, while the MRP was affixed by the original equipment manufacturer. Relying on a cited Supreme Court decision and its earlier stay order on similar facts, the Tribunal waived the entire pre-deposit of duty and penalty for hearing of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jun 2012 13:35:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116269</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found a strong prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit where the dispute concerned whether cleared parts were to be treated as complete coloured television sets under Rule 2(a) of the Interpretative Rules and whether MRP-based clearance under Notification No. 5/01 applied. It noted that the Revenue itself proceeded on the basis that the parts were deemed complete TVs, while the MRP was affixed by the original equipment manufacturer. Relying on a cited Supreme Court decision and its earlier stay order on similar facts, the Tribunal waived the entire pre-deposit of duty and penalty for hearing of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>