<?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>2009 (4) TMI 598 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125484</link>
    <description>An exemption notification must be read as a whole, and its benefit cannot be extended by ignoring express conditions attached to the linked customs exemption. Where the excise exemption was dependent on that customs notification, the conditions governing the customs benefit remained relevant to waiver of pre-deposit. No financial hardship was shown on the facts pleaded, so waiver was not justified and the stay application was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:09:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=162401" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 598 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125484</link>
      <description>An exemption notification must be read as a whole, and its benefit cannot be extended by ignoring express conditions attached to the linked customs exemption. Where the excise exemption was dependent on that customs notification, the conditions governing the customs benefit remained relevant to waiver of pre-deposit. No financial hardship was shown on the facts pleaded, so waiver was not justified and the stay application was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>