<?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 (8) TMI 678 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124647</link>
    <description>A sanctioned rebate or payable amount may be appropriated against outstanding Government dues of a previous owner where a recovery notice under the Customs Act and Central Excise Act remains operative and no stay order is produced. The purchaser had acquired only the assets in public auction and had not assumed the earlier company&#039;s liabilities, but the recovery notice issued against the purchaser was not stayed. On those facts, the adjustment of the sanctioned amount against the pending dues was upheld, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have erred in setting aside the adjudication order. The Revenue therefore succeeded and the recovery action was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Oct 2012 17:15:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=161591" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 678 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124647</link>
      <description>A sanctioned rebate or payable amount may be appropriated against outstanding Government dues of a previous owner where a recovery notice under the Customs Act and Central Excise Act remains operative and no stay order is produced. The purchaser had acquired only the assets in public auction and had not assumed the earlier company&#039;s liabilities, but the recovery notice issued against the purchaser was not stayed. On those facts, the adjustment of the sanctioned amount against the pending dues was upheld, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have erred in setting aside the adjudication order. The Revenue therefore succeeded and the recovery action was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=124647</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>