<?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 (7) TMI 926 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212249</link>
    <description>A challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s pre-deposit order in a central excise dispute failed because no substantial question of law arose. The controversy concerned alleged diversion of duty-free indigenous raw material by a 100% export-oriented unit in breach of Notification No. 1/95-C.E. The Tribunal had made prima facie findings, for waiver purposes, that the appellant had not shown clearance of goods to the alleged export-oriented recipient, that the job-workers&#039; premises showed no manufacturing activity, and that compliance with the condition of using indigenous material in manufacture of export goods was not established. The High Court found no error in that prima facie assessment and rejected the challenge.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=185662" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 926 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212249</link>
      <description>A challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s pre-deposit order in a central excise dispute failed because no substantial question of law arose. The controversy concerned alleged diversion of duty-free indigenous raw material by a 100% export-oriented unit in breach of Notification No. 1/95-C.E. The Tribunal had made prima facie findings, for waiver purposes, that the appellant had not shown clearance of goods to the alleged export-oriented recipient, that the job-workers&#039; premises showed no manufacturing activity, and that compliance with the condition of using indigenous material in manufacture of export goods was not established. The High Court found no error in that prima facie assessment and rejected the challenge.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212249</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>