<?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>2010 (3) TMI 969 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152897</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and upholding the validity of the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner for interest recovery under Section 142(1)(C)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. The decision emphasized adherence to statutory procedures for recovery and affirmed the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s authority to issue demand notices for enforcement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 May 2017 10:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169934" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 969 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152897</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the revenue&#039;s appeal, setting aside the Commissioner (Appeals) order and upholding the validity of the notice issued by the Deputy Commissioner for interest recovery under Section 142(1)(C)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. The decision emphasized adherence to statutory procedures for recovery and affirmed the Deputy Commissioner&#039;s authority to issue demand notices for enforcement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152897</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>