<?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>2013 (3) TMI 456 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221690</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that interest under Section 11AB is payable on the differential duty paid under supplementary invoices due to retrospective price escalation. The recovery of such interest is not subject to the limitation period prescribed under Section 11A. As a result, the appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed, while the appeals filed by the assessees were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195042" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 456 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221690</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that interest under Section 11AB is payable on the differential duty paid under supplementary invoices due to retrospective price escalation. The recovery of such interest is not subject to the limitation period prescribed under Section 11A. As a result, the appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed, while the appeals filed by the assessees were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>