<?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>2011 (11) TMI 260 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208522</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merit without additional deposits, as the appellant fulfilled the conditions of the stay order by paying the interest subsequently. The appeal and stay application were disposed of accordingly after the appellant&#039;s compliance with the stay order requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=181984" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 260 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208522</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a decision on merit without additional deposits, as the appellant fulfilled the conditions of the stay order by paying the interest subsequently. The appeal and stay application were disposed of accordingly after the appellant&#039;s compliance with the stay order requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208522</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>