<?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 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201481</link>
    <description>Waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F depends on more than a general allegation of denial of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that reliance on non-supply of documents must be supported by prompt, specific, and diligent pursuit of the missing material; here, the request was belated and the assessee did not clearly identify the deficiency or seek timely follow-up. It also treated the departmental record as sufficient support for the demand, noted evidence relating to a non-existing transport company, and held that cross-examination was unnecessary because no statement was relied upon. Partial pre-deposit and stay pending appeal were granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2011 18:11:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201481</link>
      <description>Waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F depends on more than a general allegation of denial of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that reliance on non-supply of documents must be supported by prompt, specific, and diligent pursuit of the missing material; here, the request was belated and the assessee did not clearly identify the deficiency or seek timely follow-up. It also treated the departmental record as sufficient support for the demand, noted evidence relating to a non-existing transport company, and held that cross-examination was unnecessary because no statement was relied upon. Partial pre-deposit and stay pending appeal were granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=201481</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>