<?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 (7) TMI 440 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119269</link>
    <description>Notification No. 6/2002-CE was a conditional exemption and its benefit was unavailable where credit of duty paid on chassis had been taken, because the no-credit condition was not satisfied. The text also notes that the assessee nevertheless had a strong prima facie case since duty was being discharged after including the chassis value. On that basis, the Tribunal waived the entire pre-deposit of duty and penalty for hearing of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2012 10:53:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156266" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 440 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119269</link>
      <description>Notification No. 6/2002-CE was a conditional exemption and its benefit was unavailable where credit of duty paid on chassis had been taken, because the no-credit condition was not satisfied. The text also notes that the assessee nevertheless had a strong prima facie case since duty was being discharged after including the chassis value. On that basis, 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>Thu, 20 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119269</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>