<?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 (8) TMI 544 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118770</link>
    <description>Payment of excise duty by cheque or demand draft is treated as made on the date the instrument is presented in the bank. Applying that rule under Rule 8(4) of the Central Excise Rules, the instalment was held to have been discharged within the prescribed thirty-day period, so the penal consequence for delayed payment was not attracted and the reduction of penalty was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2012 16:03:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155767" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 544 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118770</link>
      <description>Payment of excise duty by cheque or demand draft is treated as made on the date the instrument is presented in the bank. Applying that rule under Rule 8(4) of the Central Excise Rules, the instalment was held to have been discharged within the prescribed thirty-day period, so the penal consequence for delayed payment was not attracted and the reduction of penalty was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118770</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>