<?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 (9) TMI 428 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116683</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted a stay of the impugned order and waived the requirement for further pre-deposit pending appeal. Emphasizing the continuous nature of proceedings, the Tribunal held that the initial pre-deposit made by the appellants should suffice until finality. Therefore, it was ruled that no additional pre-deposit was necessary, and the recovery was stayed in favor of the appellants. This decision underscores the Tribunal&#039;s consideration of financial obligations in appeal proceedings to ensure justice is served.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:25:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153681" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 428 - CESTAT,  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116683</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted a stay of the impugned order and waived the requirement for further pre-deposit pending appeal. Emphasizing the continuous nature of proceedings, the Tribunal held that the initial pre-deposit made by the appellants should suffice until finality. Therefore, it was ruled that no additional pre-deposit was necessary, and the recovery was stayed in favor of the appellants. This decision underscores the Tribunal&#039;s consideration of financial obligations in appeal proceedings to ensure justice is served.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116683</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>