<?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>2013 (3) TMI 635 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174210</link>
    <description>A recovery notice issued during the pendency of appeals and stay applications was held unsustainable where it was based on the CBEC circular dated 1 January 2013. The applicable recovery guidelines had already been read down to require the revenue to consider whether delay in disposal of the stay application was attributable to the assessee and to allow reasonable time to approach the appellate forum before coercive recovery. As the appeals were filed within limitation, the stay applications remained undecided for a long period, and the notice was issued without awaiting that consideration, the notice was quashed and the consequential attachment was set aside; recovery of the confirmed demand was stayed pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2015 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399688" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 635 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174210</link>
      <description>A recovery notice issued during the pendency of appeals and stay applications was held unsustainable where it was based on the CBEC circular dated 1 January 2013. The applicable recovery guidelines had already been read down to require the revenue to consider whether delay in disposal of the stay application was attributable to the assessee and to allow reasonable time to approach the appellate forum before coercive recovery. As the appeals were filed within limitation, the stay applications remained undecided for a long period, and the notice was issued without awaiting that consideration, the notice was quashed and the consequential attachment was set aside; recovery of the confirmed demand was stayed pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>