<?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 (5) TMI 180 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247253</link>
    <description>The High Court found the order directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 53 lakhs under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, unsustainable. The Court directed the appellant to provide a bank guarantee for an additional amount of Rs. 28 lakhs within four weeks. Once the bank guarantee was furnished, the Appellate Tribunal was instructed to proceed with hearing the appeal on merit within a further four-week period. The appeal was partly allowed with these directions, and no costs were imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 May 2014 09:50:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354913" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 180 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247253</link>
      <description>The High Court found the order directing the appellant to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 53 lakhs under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944, unsustainable. The Court directed the appellant to provide a bank guarantee for an additional amount of Rs. 28 lakhs within four weeks. Once the bank guarantee was furnished, the Appellate Tribunal was instructed to proceed with hearing the appeal on merit within a further four-week period. The appeal was partly allowed with these directions, and no costs were imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>