<?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 (9) TMI 657 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251631</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in permitting duty payment via the Cenvat Credit account during the default period, violating Rule 8 (3A). The case was remanded for a new assessment to determine the duty demand to be paid in cash and interest liability for delayed payment. The appeal was allowed for reconsideration, ensuring the appellant&#039;s right to a fair hearing in the fresh order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 657 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251631</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the adjudicating authority erred in permitting duty payment via the Cenvat Credit account during the default period, violating Rule 8 (3A). The case was remanded for a new assessment to determine the duty demand to be paid in cash and interest liability for delayed payment. The appeal was allowed for reconsideration, ensuring the appellant&#039;s right to a fair hearing in the fresh order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251631</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>