<?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 (6) TMI 818 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260893</link>
    <description>The Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s request to modify the stay order, directing them to deposit Rs. 40 lakhs due to the dispute over the assessable value of RCC pipes manufactured in the factory, not at the construction site, rendering them ineligible for exemption under Notification No.1/2011-CE(NT). Despite the appellant&#039;s claim of shifting the manufacturing site, the Tribunal found the deposit amount reasonable and extended the deadline for compliance by six weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2015 17:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388527" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 818 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260893</link>
      <description>The Tribunal denied the appellant&#039;s request to modify the stay order, directing them to deposit Rs. 40 lakhs due to the dispute over the assessable value of RCC pipes manufactured in the factory, not at the construction site, rendering them ineligible for exemption under Notification No.1/2011-CE(NT). Despite the appellant&#039;s claim of shifting the manufacturing site, the Tribunal found the deposit amount reasonable and extended the deadline for compliance by six weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260893</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>