<?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 (8) TMI 813 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250863</link>
    <description>The Tribunal disposed of stay petitions against M/s. Alcome Overseas Pvt. Ltd., directing a deposit of Rs. 60 lakhs out of a total demand of Rs. 2,29,68,446 based on prima facie findings. The High Court considered the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s stay order, noting the plea of violation of natural justice but allowed time for clarifications. The Tribunal proceeded due to appellants&#039; failure to submit written submissions and attend hearings. Allegations of delaying tactics and responsibility to procure documents were raised, with the Tribunal emphasizing the duty of the Revenue and the applicants&#039; role. The Tribunal rejected modification requests and directed pre-deposit compliance within twelve weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2014 09:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=363924" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (8) TMI 813 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250863</link>
      <description>The Tribunal disposed of stay petitions against M/s. Alcome Overseas Pvt. Ltd., directing a deposit of Rs. 60 lakhs out of a total demand of Rs. 2,29,68,446 based on prima facie findings. The High Court considered the challenge to the Tribunal&#039;s stay order, noting the plea of violation of natural justice but allowed time for clarifications. The Tribunal proceeded due to appellants&#039; failure to submit written submissions and attend hearings. Allegations of delaying tactics and responsibility to procure documents were raised, with the Tribunal emphasizing the duty of the Revenue and the applicants&#039; role. The Tribunal rejected modification requests and directed pre-deposit compliance within twelve weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>