<?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 (6) TMI 434 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234609</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Customs, Excise &amp;amp; Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order requiring the petitioner to deposit the full duty amount for hearing an appeal related to duty payment on imported goods. The Court found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s argument against the deposit requirement, emphasizing the unchallenged adverse test report results. The petition was dismissed, with a four-week extension granted for the petitioner to comply with the deposit directive to proceed with a merit-based appeal hearing. Compliance within the specified timeframe was deemed crucial for a substantive hearing on the appeal&#039;s merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 May 2013 15:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197019" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 434 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234609</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Customs, Excise &amp;amp; Service Tax Appellate Tribunal&#039;s order requiring the petitioner to deposit the full duty amount for hearing an appeal related to duty payment on imported goods. The Court found no merit in the petitioner&#039;s argument against the deposit requirement, emphasizing the unchallenged adverse test report results. The petition was dismissed, with a four-week extension granted for the petitioner to comply with the deposit directive to proceed with a merit-based appeal hearing. Compliance within the specified timeframe was deemed crucial for a substantive hearing on the appeal&#039;s merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234609</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>