<?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>2008 (5) TMI 493 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123575</link>
    <description>In a stay application under indirect tax law, full waiver of pre-deposit was refused where the appellant failed to establish a strong prima facie case on classification and excisability, and the exemption notification did not assist on the facts. The Tribunal nevertheless considered the pleaded financial hardship and the potential impact on revival of the unit, and granted only partial interim relief by directing a reduced deposit and staying recovery of the balance on compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2012 14:52:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 493 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123575</link>
      <description>In a stay application under indirect tax law, full waiver of pre-deposit was refused where the appellant failed to establish a strong prima facie case on classification and excisability, and the exemption notification did not assist on the facts. The Tribunal nevertheless considered the pleaded financial hardship and the potential impact on revival of the unit, and granted only partial interim relief by directing a reduced deposit and staying recovery of the balance on compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123575</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>