<?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>2014 (2) TMI 777 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244183</link>
    <description>Interest on delayed duty payment arising from transit loss in excess of the condonable limit could not be demanded under the general interest provision where the governing warehousing arrangement made interest recoverable only as specified by the Board and no interest was prescribed for the relevant default. The Tribunal noted that the cited circular addressed recovery of duty when the warehousing certificate was not received, but did not provide for interest, so confirmation of interest under Section 11AB was unsustainable on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346530" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 777 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244183</link>
      <description>Interest on delayed duty payment arising from transit loss in excess of the condonable limit could not be demanded under the general interest provision where the governing warehousing arrangement made interest recoverable only as specified by the Board and no interest was prescribed for the relevant default. The Tribunal noted that the cited circular addressed recovery of duty when the warehousing certificate was not received, but did not provide for interest, so confirmation of interest under Section 11AB was unsustainable on that basis. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244183</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>