<?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 (10) TMI 234 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237779</link>
    <description>In a stay matter, partial pre-deposit was directed where the record showed a prima facie case of unaccounted scrap purchases and alleged unaccounted production, sufficient to protect the Revenue&#039;s interest. The objection that the adjudicating authority had travelled beyond the show cause notice was left for final hearing and did not justify complete waiver at the interim stage. The company was required to deposit Rs. 6,00,000, after which the balance pre-deposit was waived and recovery stayed. For the directors, the penalties did not require pre-deposit for hearing of their appeals, so their stay applications were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Oct 2013 06:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=200186" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 234 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237779</link>
      <description>In a stay matter, partial pre-deposit was directed where the record showed a prima facie case of unaccounted scrap purchases and alleged unaccounted production, sufficient to protect the Revenue&#039;s interest. The objection that the adjudicating authority had travelled beyond the show cause notice was left for final hearing and did not justify complete waiver at the interim stage. The company was required to deposit Rs. 6,00,000, after which the balance pre-deposit was waived and recovery stayed. For the directors, the penalties did not require pre-deposit for hearing of their appeals, so their stay applications were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>