<?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 (12) TMI 924 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241259</link>
    <description>The appeals were filed against the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order confirming the demand for Merchant Overtime (MOT) from the appellant, who are merchant exporters. The court found that Section 35F does not apply to appeals related to MOT but specifically to duty demanded and penalty levied. Consequently, the stay applications were dismissed, and the appeals were directed to proceed for regular hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2013 05:43:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340044" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 924 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241259</link>
      <description>The appeals were filed against the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order confirming the demand for Merchant Overtime (MOT) from the appellant, who are merchant exporters. The court found that Section 35F does not apply to appeals related to MOT but specifically to duty demanded and penalty levied. Consequently, the stay applications were dismissed, and the appeals were directed to proceed for regular hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241259</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>