<?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 (3) TMI 1039 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180735</link>
    <description>In stay proceedings, the dispute concerned whether printing and lamination of poly film amounted to manufacture, whether the product could be classified under Chapter 49, and whether the extended limitation period was available. The Tribunal noted competing prima facie views on whether the activity created a new product with a distinct name, character and use, and balanced revenue protection against hardship. It further considered the appellant&#039;s existing deposit and offer of additional payment. The appellant was directed to make a further pre-deposit, and on that deposit the balance duty, interest and penalty were waived with recovery stayed during the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 Apr 2016 11:01:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=422086" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 1039 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180735</link>
      <description>In stay proceedings, the dispute concerned whether printing and lamination of poly film amounted to manufacture, whether the product could be classified under Chapter 49, and whether the extended limitation period was available. The Tribunal noted competing prima facie views on whether the activity created a new product with a distinct name, character and use, and balanced revenue protection against hardship. It further considered the appellant&#039;s existing deposit and offer of additional payment. The appellant was directed to make a further pre-deposit, and on that deposit the balance duty, interest and penalty were waived with recovery stayed during the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180735</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>