<?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 (5) TMI 746 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212173</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted a waiver of the pre-deposit demand during the appeal&#039;s pendency, indicating a lack of clarity on the issue of treating forfeited security deposits as additional consideration under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision emphasized the complexity in determining the nature of forfeited security in relation to excise laws, stressing the need for a clear nexus between forfeited amounts and clearance activities for tax assessment purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185586" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 746 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212173</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted a waiver of the pre-deposit demand during the appeal&#039;s pendency, indicating a lack of clarity on the issue of treating forfeited security deposits as additional consideration under the Central Excise Act, 1944. The decision emphasized the complexity in determining the nature of forfeited security in relation to excise laws, stressing the need for a clear nexus between forfeited amounts and clearance activities for tax assessment purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>