<?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 (9) TMI 244 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236811</link>
    <description>The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit Rs.1,00,00,000/- within 8 weeks, with further conditions related to asset disposal and compliance reporting. The predeposit of the balance amount of duty and penalty was waived upon compliance, with recovery stayed during the appeal process. The Tribunal noted that Isolator metallic should be classified under Heading 85.38, rejecting arguments based on previous orders and financial hardship as determinative factors. The applicant&#039;s financial difficulties and historical classification were not considered sufficient for an unconditional stay, leading to the decision on the deposit amount and conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2013 15:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=199218" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (9) TMI 244 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236811</link>
      <description>The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit Rs.1,00,00,000/- within 8 weeks, with further conditions related to asset disposal and compliance reporting. The predeposit of the balance amount of duty and penalty was waived upon compliance, with recovery stayed during the appeal process. The Tribunal noted that Isolator metallic should be classified under Heading 85.38, rejecting arguments based on previous orders and financial hardship as determinative factors. The applicant&#039;s financial difficulties and historical classification were not considered sufficient for an unconditional stay, leading to the decision on the deposit amount and conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236811</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>