<?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 (6) TMI 435 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123974</link>
    <description>Recovery of excise duty and penalty was stayed pending appeal where the dispute concerned levy on compensation received from an insurance company. The order records a prima facie view that no duty was justified on the insurance compensation and that the insurance claim was separate from the clearance of goods. On that basis, the appellant was treated as having a strong case for interim relief, and recovery was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2012 11:30:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=160932" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 435 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123974</link>
      <description>Recovery of excise duty and penalty was stayed pending appeal where the dispute concerned levy on compensation received from an insurance company. The order records a prima facie view that no duty was justified on the insurance compensation and that the insurance claim was separate from the clearance of goods. On that basis, the appellant was treated as having a strong case for interim relief, and recovery was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=123974</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>