<?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 (2) TMI 1015 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153370</link>
    <description>At the interim stage, the tribunal accepted that the duty demand could be stayed where the product had not been shown to be marketable and was therefore not clearly excisable. On that basis, the stay and waiver application was allowed, and the impugned order was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2013 18:36:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=170405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (2) TMI 1015 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153370</link>
      <description>At the interim stage, the tribunal accepted that the duty demand could be stayed where the product had not been shown to be marketable and was therefore not clearly excisable. On that basis, the stay and waiver application was allowed, and the impugned order was stayed until disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=153370</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>