<?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>2006 (2) TMI 410 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117679</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty for two diesel generating sets (D.G. Sets). The Tribunal determined that the D.G. Sets, each weighing around 65 tonnes and incapable of being moved as a whole, were not marketable according to the Supreme Court precedent and the Circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. As a result, the Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty for the appeal, allowing the stay petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2012 17:58:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154676" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 410 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117679</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty for two diesel generating sets (D.G. Sets). The Tribunal determined that the D.G. Sets, each weighing around 65 tonnes and incapable of being moved as a whole, were not marketable according to the Supreme Court precedent and the Circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. As a result, the Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty for the appeal, allowing the stay petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117679</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>