<?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 (3) TMI 1194 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209252</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for clarification of the amount payable by the appellants as per the impugned order. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the confusion regarding the interest demanded on payments made voluntarily was found to be incorrect. The Tribunal emphasized the need for clarity on the amount payable and disposed of the stay application accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2013 13:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182704" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1194 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209252</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for clarification of the amount payable by the appellants as per the impugned order. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, and the confusion regarding the interest demanded on payments made voluntarily was found to be incorrect. The Tribunal emphasized the need for clarity on the amount payable and disposed of the stay application accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>