<?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 (8) TMI 980 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151761</link>
    <description>Rule 20 permits excisable goods to be removed to a warehouse without payment of duty, subject to conditions including any interest specified by the Board. The assessee relied on the relevant CBEC circular to argue that only duty recovery was provided for when the warehousing certificate was not received, and that no interest liability had been prescribed. The Tribunal found substance in that contention, but since the point had not been raised before the Commissioner and there was no finding from the adjudicating authority, the question of interest on differential duty for re-warehoused goods was remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jun 2013 11:32:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=168799" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 980 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151761</link>
      <description>Rule 20 permits excisable goods to be removed to a warehouse without payment of duty, subject to conditions including any interest specified by the Board. The assessee relied on the relevant CBEC circular to argue that only duty recovery was provided for when the warehousing certificate was not received, and that no interest liability had been prescribed. The Tribunal found substance in that contention, but since the point had not been raised before the Commissioner and there was no finding from the adjudicating authority, the question of interest on differential duty for re-warehoused goods was remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151761</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>