<?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>2012 (1) TMI 120 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246358</link>
    <description>A transferee of fixed assets and land cannot be made liable for a predecessor&#039;s excise dues, including interest and penalty, unless the statute authorises such recovery and there is proof that the transferee succeeded to the business of the defaulter. The recovery provision relied on applies only to specified movable assets in the successor&#039;s custody or possession and does not extend to immovable property such as land. It also cannot be applied retrospectively to a transaction completed on 19-04-2001 when the provision came into force only in 2004. On that basis, the demand was held unsustainable and the recovery order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Apr 2014 16:06:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=352979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (1) TMI 120 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246358</link>
      <description>A transferee of fixed assets and land cannot be made liable for a predecessor&#039;s excise dues, including interest and penalty, unless the statute authorises such recovery and there is proof that the transferee succeeded to the business of the defaulter. The recovery provision relied on applies only to specified movable assets in the successor&#039;s custody or possession and does not extend to immovable property such as land. It also cannot be applied retrospectively to a transaction completed on 19-04-2001 when the provision came into force only in 2004. On that basis, the demand was held unsustainable and the recovery order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246358</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>