<?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 518 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116322</link>
    <description>Interest is mandatory on delayed payment of duty under the fortnightly payment facility in Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, so recovery of the interest amount was not stayed. Pre-deposit under Section 35F does not extend to interest amounts, making waiver of pre-deposit for interest unnecessary. Relief on the penalty component was available on the facts, so waiver and stay were granted for penalty while refused for interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:59:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153320" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 518 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116322</link>
      <description>Interest is mandatory on delayed payment of duty under the fortnightly payment facility in Rule 8(3) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, so recovery of the interest amount was not stayed. Pre-deposit under Section 35F does not extend to interest amounts, making waiver of pre-deposit for interest unnecessary. Relief on the penalty component was available on the facts, so waiver and stay were granted for penalty while refused for interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>