<?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 (12) TMI 872 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254529</link>
    <description>The pre-deposit requirement under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 was treated as satisfied where the appellant had already paid an amount that was appropriated in the impugned order. That credited amount was regarded as meeting the statutory pre-deposit, so no further deposit was required and the appeal was maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2014 22:07:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=371980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 872 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254529</link>
      <description>The pre-deposit requirement under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 was treated as satisfied where the appellant had already paid an amount that was appropriated in the impugned order. That credited amount was regarded as meeting the statutory pre-deposit, so no further deposit was required and the appeal was maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>