<?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 873 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244279</link>
    <description>A seven-day delay in filing the cross-objection was condoned because the explanation for the belated filing was accepted as sufficient cause. In the CENVAT credit dispute, the matter was treated as covered by earlier Tribunal decisions, which was found to establish a strong prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty, along with stay of recovery until final hearing of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Feb 2014 17:18:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346841" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 873 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244279</link>
      <description>A seven-day delay in filing the cross-objection was condoned because the explanation for the belated filing was accepted as sufficient cause. In the CENVAT credit dispute, the matter was treated as covered by earlier Tribunal decisions, which was found to establish a strong prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty, interest and penalty, along with stay of recovery until final hearing of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244279</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>