<?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>2016 (2) TMI 327 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271622</link>
    <description>Special recovery powers used to adjust a cash rebate against alleged dues required prior notice to the assessee, because garnishee-like recovery affects money otherwise payable and must follow fair procedure; the adjustment made without notice was invalid. The recovery machinery under section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962, as applied to central excise matters, was treated as extending to movable property, so cash rebate could in principle be adjusted against recoverable dues. A demand for interest that was still sub judice and had not attained finality could not be recovered through that special adjustment mechanism; the adjustment was therefore set aside and the appropriated amount ordered to be restored with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2017 10:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 327 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271622</link>
      <description>Special recovery powers used to adjust a cash rebate against alleged dues required prior notice to the assessee, because garnishee-like recovery affects money otherwise payable and must follow fair procedure; the adjustment made without notice was invalid. The recovery machinery under section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962, as applied to central excise matters, was treated as extending to movable property, so cash rebate could in principle be adjusted against recoverable dues. A demand for interest that was still sub judice and had not attained finality could not be recovered through that special adjustment mechanism; the adjustment was therefore set aside and the appropriated amount ordered to be restored with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271622</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>