<?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>2015 (1) TMI 676 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255477</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding of evasion of excise duty based on evidence such as duplicate invoices. The appellant&#039;s challenge on the duty amount was dismissed, with the Court requiring a 25% deposit without pre-deposit for penalties. An extension of four months was granted for payment in installments, with the appeal to be reinstated if payment is made as directed. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Jan 2015 13:11:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=374133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 676 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255477</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the Tribunal&#039;s finding of evasion of excise duty based on evidence such as duplicate invoices. The appellant&#039;s challenge on the duty amount was dismissed, with the Court requiring a 25% deposit without pre-deposit for penalties. An extension of four months was granted for payment in installments, with the appeal to be reinstated if payment is made as directed. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255477</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>